IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.38216 of 2007 BASUDEO PAL …Petitioner Versus STATE OF BIHAR …Opposite party ----------- 03. 13.08.2010 Heard counsel for the parties. Petitioner is the PDS dealer and thus a licensee under the Unification Order. He questions the lodgment of the FIR. on the ground that no case is made out even if each and every word stated therein is/are accepted to be true. I have perused the FIR. There is allegation that petitioner being the PDS dealer had lifted ten drums of blue kerosene oil. Four drums were directed to be kept at the business premises, whereas one drum of kerosene oil allegedly was diverted to some other place. The dealer was not found present during inspection. The driver disclosed the facts to the informant leading to lodgment of the case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present prosecution is malicious one as the husband of the local Mukhiya against whom the petitioner had filed a case was instrumental in lodging the present FIR. This Court finds that the FIR was lodged by the Marketing Officer. On a bare perusal of the FIR, it is obvious that all foundational facts constituting offence(s) have been laid therein. This Court, therefore, finds no reason to interfere with the lodging of the FIR. Institution of FIR only ignites 2 investigation where the cases of the prosecution and the accused have to be considered by the Investigating Agency before reaching to a conclusion. In that view of the matter also, this Court does not find any merit in this application. All in all, there is no merit in this application which is accordingly dismissed. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )