Short Note : Held : The main contention of the applicant-complainant is that while passing order under S. 203 of the Code the Magistrate can only look into the statements of the witnesses recorded by him or some other Magistrate on his direction, or the statements of the witnesses recorded by the police in the investigation ordered by the Magistrate under S. 202 and the Magistrate could not have looked into the Sanha report for the purposes of passing the order under S. 203. When there was positive evidence of the 3 eye witnesses examined by the complainant, it was not proper on the part of the trial Magistrate to rely on the Sanha report and discard their statements when in fact, Sanha report has not much evidentiary value as only substance of the information is recorded under S. 155 of the Code in respect of non-cognizable offences. Reliance has also been placed on Chandra Deo v. Prakash Chandra ( AIR 1963 SC 1480 ) that the Magistrate acting under S. 203 has to satisfy himself that there is sufficient ground for proceeding and in order to come to this conclusion he is entitled to consider the evidence taken by him or recorded in an enquiry under S. 202 or statements made in an investigation under that section, as the case may be. He is not entitled to rely upon any material besides this. It is true that section 203 mentions that after considering the statement on oath of the complainant and the witnesses and the result of the investigation or inquiry, if any, under section 202, there is in his judgment no sufficient ground for proceeding the magistrate may dismiss the complaint. Section 202 refers to enquiry or investigation to be made by any Magistrate subordinate to him or by police officer. There is no prohibition either in section 203 or 202 that at that stage the Magistrate cannot refer to the F.I.R. lodged by the complainant either under S. 154 or 155 of the Code. Though the F.I.R. is not a substantive evidence it is an important piece of evidence to judge the veracity of the complainant's story as given because it is the story given at the earliest opportunity and there is no likelihood of any embellishment. Though the F.I.R. is not a substantive evidence it is an important piece of evidence to judge the veracity of the complainant's story as given because it is the story given at the earliest opportunity and there is no likelihood of any embellishment. The F.I.R. lodged under S. 154 or 155 has higher evidentiary value than the Rojnamacha recorded under section 155 because in the F.I.R. the report of the complainant is taken down verbatim and the complainant is required to sign the report, whereas under section 155 only substance of the report is taken down. But still the importance of F.I.R. or Rojnamcha cannot be minimized. In the present case, the complainant did lodge the Rojnamcha report, a copy of which is placed on record, and in this report there is no mention of the names of non-applicants 3 & 5 Samnoo Kachhi and Ashok Sharma. The complainant has not explained as to how their names are missing from the Sanha report. Therefore, there was nothing wrong on the part of the trial Magistrate in relying on the Sanha report in coming to the conclusion as to whether there was sufficient ground for proceeding against these 2 non-applicants. The decision of the Supreme Court referred to above is clearly distinguishable. In that case the complaint was dismissed, which is not the case here and only 2 out of 5 accused have been discharged and against the rest offences have been registered under sections 323 and 448 I.P.C. This apart in the Supreme Court case the trial Magistrate while passing the order under section 203 referred to certain statements recorded in another case and also the statements recorded by police on the complaint of some other person other than the complainant in the case. There is no reason why the orders of the Courts below be disturbed when it cannot be said that there has been flagrant mis-appreciation of evidence by the lower Court. Sheoprasad v. Emperor (AIR 1938 Nag. 394) Revision dismissed.