IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.45031 of 2007 SIKANDAR PRASAD SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 2/ 19/01/2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of cognizance dated 22.8.2007 by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class (West), Muzaffarpur in Paroo P.S. Case No.77 of 2006 corresponding to G.R. No.905/2006, T.R. No.3563/07 under Section-302/34 of I.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not charge-sheeted by the police. The Magistrate acted illegally by taking cognizance against the petitioner only on the basis of a protest petition on behalf of the informant. The order of cognizance makes it apparent that though there may have been a protest petition by the informant, the Magistrate proceeded to take cognizance against the petitioner on the basis of materials in the case diary by adequate reference to the relevant paragraphs. This Court is not persuaded on the submission that if the petitioner was not charge- sheeted, not mentioned in the F.I.R., but if his name 2 has transpired during investigation, the only remedy available to the prosecution was to summon him under Section-319 of Cr.P.C. If the Magistrate on the basis of investigation was satisfied of the involvement of any person, his hands were not fettered at the stage of taking cognizance notwithstanding what the police may have submitted in the form of a charge-sheet to be done on the basis of the materials collected during investigation. The application stands dismissed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)