IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.32779 of 2002 SHYAMDEO GUPTA SON OF LATE HARDEO LAL GUPTA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND P.O. GURU BAZAR, KANKARBAGH, KARHAGOLA, P.S. BARARI, DISTRICT KATIHAR. ... ... PETITIONER. Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. SHEKHAR KUMAR S/O LATE VIDYA BHASKAR SHARAN, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA- JANTA CHOWK, PURNEA, P.S. K.HAAT, DISTRICT PURNEA. ... ... OPPOSITE PARTIES. ----------- 10. 6.7.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The present petition has got a chequered history. The sole petitioner, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has prayed for quashing of order dated 6.6.2001 whereby Sri S.D. Singh, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Purnea had taken cognizance of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1981 and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code in Complaint Case No.406 of 2001. Though the order of cognizance was passed on 6.6.2001, the present petition was filed after 1 & 1/2 years of the order i.e. on 15.11.2002. On 20.12.2002, the present petition was dismissed due to non prosecution. Subsequently, on the basis of restoration petition, the case was restored and 2 N.H./ on 12.4.2004, notice was issued to opposite party no.2 to file show cause and in the meanwhile, further proceeding in the court below was directed to remain stayed. On 2.5.2005, again the petition was dismissed due to non prosecution. After restoration again on 19.6.2006, the case was dismissed for default. I have perused the materials available on record including complaint petition as well as the impugned order. I do not find any defect in the order of cognizance. The petitioner has not made out an exceptional case warranting exercise of inherent jurisdiction in his favour. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in this petition and the petition stands rejected. ( Rakesh Kumar,J.)