JUDGMENT B. P. Jha, J. The petitioner has moved this Court for quashing an order dated 3.1.69. passed by Sri R.C. Ram, Ist Additional Munsif of Gopalganj. By this order he directed that a complaint be filed in respect of the offences under sections 193, 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code before the Sub-divisional Magistrate of Gopalganj. Pursuant thereto a complaint was lodged on 18.1.1969. An appeal before the learned Sessions Judge of Chapra against the said order was preferred and the learned Sessions Judge quashed the order dated 3.1.69. in regard to filing of complaint in respect of the offence under sections 193 and 467 of the Indian Penal Code but he refused to quash the order in respect of the offence under section 471 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The petitioner filed a money suit against the defendant. The suit was dismissed and there was a finding that the Plaintiff had done forgery. Against that order a first appeal was preferred before the District Judge which was heard by the Subordinate Judge, who affirmed the judgment and decree of the trial court. In second appeal the appeal was partly allowed. Thereafter, on 1.6.68, the defendants filed an application for lodging a complaint in respect of the forgery committed by the plaintiff. In this connection section 476 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is relevant. It provides that before initiating the enquiry under subsection (1) of section 476 of the Code, the Munsif or the Magistrate must come to the conclusion that it is expedient in the interest of justice to hold an enquiry in the matter. If he thinks that it is not necessary to hold a preliminary enquiry, he will give such a finding. But, in the present case there was no enquiry under section 476 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the absence of such an enquiry, I hold that the direction of the Munsif to lodge the complaint is illegal and without jurisdiction. If he thought that no enquiry was necessary, he should have given such a finding. But in the absence of this finding, I hold that the magistrate did not comply with the provisions of section 476 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and therefore the very direction of the Munsif to lodge the complaint is illegal and without jurisdiction. If he thought that no enquiry was necessary, he should have given such a finding. But in the absence of this finding, I hold that the magistrate did not comply with the provisions of section 476 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and therefore the very direction of the Munsif to lodge the complaint is illegal and without jurisdiction. I, therefore, quash the order dated the 3rd January, 1969, by which he directed to lodge the complaint with regard to the offences under sections 193, 471 and 467 of Indian Penal Code, as without jurisdiction. The petition is accordingly allowed and that portion of the order directing to lodge complaint under section 471 of the Indian Penal Code passed by the Sessions Judge is set aside. Application allowed.