IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.41605 of 2006 BRIJ NANDAN PANDEY Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 11 13.8.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also learned counsel for O.P. No. 2 and learned A.P.P. for the State. Through this application the petitioner seeks for quashing of the order dated 30.8.2006 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram in Complaint Case No. 76 of 1990, whereby he has taken cognizance for offences under sections 147, 323 and 452 I.P.C. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that although the parties to the litigation are close agnate yet during the pendnecy of the inquiry under section 202 Cr.P.C., the learned Magistrate holding such an inquiry called for a report from the police regarding situation of the land in dispute. He also referred to Annexure 3 which is a report dated 24.3.1990 submitted by the Officer Incharge, Nauhatta P.S. wherein he had recommended for initiating a proceeding under section 107 Cr.P.C. Looking at these documents would amount to a looking into facts and figures which are not within the ambit of the powers under section 482 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to my judgment in Bibi Gulshan Vs. The State of Bihar reported in 2007 (1) PLJR 701 and sought to submit that the object behind the provisions of section 202 Cr.P.C. is to enable the Magistrate to scrutinize carefully the - 2 - allegations made in the complaint with a view to prevent a person named therein as accused from being called upon to face an obviously frivolous complaint. Unfortunately at this stage this Court cannot declare this complaint petition to be a frivolous one and that apart there was no such material before the Magistrate which could have enabled him to safeguard the interest of the accused persons moreso when the report of the Officer Incharge, Nauhatta P.S. (Annexure 3) and the additional report called for by the Magistrate in course of the inquiry under section 202 Cr.P.C. were matters extraneous to the inquiry under section 202 Cr.P.C. In this view of the matter I do not find any merit in this application which is dismissed. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to raise all these issues at the time of framing of chare or in course of the trial. Spd/- (Abhijit Sinha, J.)