IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.34037 of 2009 BABLU TIWARY @ VISHWANATH TRIPATHI Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 20.7.2010. Heard Sri Umakant Shukla, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The grievance of the petitioner is that there was no evidence as to how the name of the petitioner could be brought in connection with the seized Khair wood or how the same belonged to the petitioner. Cognizance order could not be passed after holding a full-fledged trial. It is merely to test the allegation of commission of offence which could be tested only after trial begins and evidence is recorded. As regards the summoning order that appears justified and in that view the petition is dismissed. B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha, J. )