JUDGMENT : A. Pasayat, J. - Sole grievance of the Petitioner is about nonacceptance of the first-information-report stated to have been filed on 1.4.1998 by the Officer-in-charge of Mahanga Police Station and the Superintendent of Police, Cuttack. 2. When the information is laid with the Police, but no action in that behalf is taken, the complainant is given power u/s 190 read with Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, the 'Code') to lay the complaint before the Magistrate having jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence and the Magistrate is required to enquire into the complaint as provided in Chapter XV of the Code. In case the Magistrate after recording evidence finds a prima facie case, instead of issuing process to the accused, he is empowered to direct the police concerned to investigate into offence under Chapter XII of the Code and to submit a report. If he finds that the complaint does not disclose any offence to take further action, he is empowered to dismiss the complaint u/s 203 of the Code. In case he finds that the complaint/evidence recorded prima facie discloses an offence, he is empowered to take cognizance of the offence and would issue process to the accused. These aspects have been highlighted by the Apex Court in All India Institute of Medical Sciences Employees' Union (Reg) through its President v. Union of India and Ors. : 1997 SCC (Cri) 303. 3. In case grievance is made that the first information report has not been acted upon or that necessary action is not being taken, the procedure as laid-down in the Code is to be followed. The position was highlighted by this Court in Biraja Charan Pattanaik v. State of Orissa and Ors. : 84 (1997) CLT 158. 4. As due procedure as laid down in the Code has not been adopted, the present writ application is misconceived, and is dismissed. P.K. Mohanty, J. 5. I agree. Final Result : Dismissed