Order This is a petition under Sec.482, Criminal Procedure Code to quash the proceedings in C.C.No. 2370 of 1985 on the file of the VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, G.T., Madras. 2. The case of the petitioners is that a final report under Sec.173, Criminal Proocedure Code has been filed by the police to the effect that an offence under Sec.160, Indian Penal Code, appeared to have been committed by the petitioners. It is argued that from the materials placed before the Court viz., the statements of witnesses, the ingredients for the offence are not made out and there was a difference between “fighting”, which is an essential ingredient of an offence defined under Sec.159, Indian Penal Code, and punishable under Sec.160, Indian Penal Code. He also produced to that effect a decision of the High Court of Mysore in Korg Shetty v. State of Mysore Korg Shetty v. State of Mysore 1971 MLJ. (Crl.) 246. 3. In the present case, it appears that the Magistrate has only issued summons to the petitioners. Once the accused appear, the Magistrate will follow the procedure prescribed under Sec.251, Criminal Procedure Code, as the case is summons case. As per that section, it is not necessary for the Magistrate to frame a formal charge, but he may also, if he finds it proper and expedient, frame a charge. In fact, the particulars of the offence will be stated to the petitioners orally and that would tantamount to the charge if no plea is put forth by the accused. There is no other criminal trial without a charge. The power of framing the charge, either orally or in writing, includes also the power of discharge. It is well accepted principle of Jurisprudence that in matters of procedure what is not prescribed is admissible. Further, under Sec.251, Criminal Procedure Code the Magistrate after stating the particulars, shall ask the accused whether he pleads guilty or has any defence to make. Therefore, the petitioner has got a choice between three solutions; either to plead guilty or plead simply not guilty or put forth his case. Therefore, it is open to the petitioners to plead before the Magistrate that in the present case there is no room for procedure, since from the statements furnished to them there is no ingredient constituting an offence. Therefore, it is open to the petitioners to plead before the Magistrate that in the present case there is no room for procedure, since from the statements furnished to them there is no ingredient constituting an offence. They can also, if they are so advised to, file a petition for discharge, and invite the Magistrate to pass orders thereon. If the Magistrate passes such an order and if the petitioners, upon perusing the same, feel that the order is wrong it is always open to them to challenge that order in the manner known to law. When a Magistrate has not chosen to interrogate the petitioners under Sec.251, Criminal Procedure Code and before the petitioners appraise the Magistrate about their plea and before the Magistrate passes an order thereon, there is no reason for this Court to interfere under Sec.482, Criminal Procedure Code. With the above observations, the petition is dismissed. B.S. ----- Petition dismissed.