B. K. RATHI, J. This is an application under Section 482, Cr. P. C. to quash the order dated 30-8-99, Annexure-4 to the petition, passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura under Section 267, Cr. P. C. issuing warrant b against the petitioners in Crime No. 88 of 1999 under Sections 395 and 412, I. P. C. , P. S. Govind Nagar, District Mathura. 2. In brief, the relevant facts are that bofh the petitioners are presently lodged in District Jail, Gha/. iabad. An application was moved before C. J. M. , Mathura by the police of P. S. Govind Nagar, Mathura that the petitioners are wanted in Crime No. 88 of 1999 under Sections 395 and 412, l. P. C. and therefore, they may be summoned under Section 267, Cr. P. C. from District Jail, Ghaziabad. The learned C. J. M. has issued notice under that Section in Form No. 36 to the Jail Superintendent, Ghaziabad to transfer the petitioners to District Jail, Mathura. This order dated 30-8-99 Annexure-4 to the petition has been challenged before me. It has been argued that the order is illegal as no in quiry, trial or proceeding is pending in the Court of C. J. M. , Malhura and therefore, an order under Section 267, Cr. P. C. cannot be passed. The learned counsel, in support of his argument, has referred to the case of "mukesh andothers\. State of U. P. andothers, 1998 ACC page 434 : 1998 (1) JIC 132 (SC) (All)", decided by Honble J. C. Gupta, J. The Honble Judge considered Section 267, Cr. P. C. and also Form No. 36 prescribed in the Cr. P. C. It is proper to reproduce betow sub-clause (1) and its clause (a) of Section 267, Cr. P. C. The same read as under: "267. Power to require attendance of prisoners: (1) Whenever, in the course of an inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Code, it appears to a Criminal Court (a) that a person confined or detained in a prison should be brought before the Court for answering to a charge of an offence, or for purpose of any proceeding against him, or. . . " 3. . . " 3. After considering this provision and Form No. 36, the learned Single Judge observed that the expression "other proceeding under this Code" read with From No. 36 leaves no room of doubt that it would mean only such proceeding as may be pending in a Court. He further held that "other proceeding" does not include the investigation by the police and the inves tigation of the offence by the police and interrogation cannot fall under other proceedings under the Code for the pur poses which are included in Section 267, Cr. P. C. 4. With great respect to the Honble Single Judge, I am of the view that the words "other proceeding under this Code and prescribed Form No. 36" have not been properly interpreted. The words "other proceeding under this Code" can not be interpreted to mean that the proceeding should be in the Court. It means any proceeding under the Code of Criminal Procedure. Had the intention of the Legislature been as interpreted by the Honble Judge, the words used would have been "other proceeding in the Court". The Legislature in its Wisdom has not been used the word court. On the other hand, the words used arc "other proceeding under this Code". Therefore, the same can not be interpreted to mean only the proceeding of the Court and excluding proceedings under any other provision of the Cr. P. C, such as recording of F. I. R. , investigation, arrest, summoning of the accused for interrogation, search etc. In my opinion the proceedings concerning investigation are also proceedings under the Code of Criminal Procedure. 5. My view gets support from the other provisions of the Cr. PC. The preamble of this Act is "an act to con sofidate and amend the laws relating to Criminal Procedure. " As against this in C. P. C. of 1908 the preamble is "an act to consofidate and amend the laws relating to the procedure of the Court of Civil Judica ture. The words "procedure of Court of Civil Judicature" have been intentionally omitted by the Legis latureinpre amble of Cr. P. C. and "procedure of the Court of Criminal Judica ture" has not been mentioned. This cannot be said as omission. But it appears that the words have intentionally been omitted. The words "procedure of Court of Civil Judicature" have been intentionally omitted by the Legis latureinpre amble of Cr. P. C. and "procedure of the Court of Criminal Judica ture" has not been mentioned. This cannot be said as omission. But it appears that the words have intentionally been omitted. The C. P. C. applies to the proceedings of the Court only as it speaks; whereas the entire criminal proceedings under __ Cr. P. C. whatever may be the stage, are the proceed ings under the Code. 6. It will also be useful to mention some other provisions of Cr. P. C. Defini tions have been given in Section 2, Clause (h) of Section 2 reads as follows: (h) "investigation" includes all the proceedings under this code for the collection of evidence conducted by a police officer or by any person (other than a Magistrate) who is authorized by a Magistrate in this behalf. " This definition of investigation does not leave any room of doubt that the inves tigation is a proceeding under the Code within the meaning of Section 267, Cr. P. C. 7. The other relevant provision, in my opinion, for the purposes of controversy in issue is Section 156, Cr. P. C which confers power to the Police Officers to investigate the cognizable case. Clause (2) of Section 156, Cr. PC. is relevant and is reproduced betow: "156. Police Officers power to investigate cognizable case. (2) No proceeding of a police officer in any such case shall at any stage be called in question on the ground that the case was one which such officer was not empowered under this Section to investigate. " This clause also shows that the proceedings of investigation before the police officer are also the proceedings under the Code. The heading of Section 157, Cr. P. C. is "procedure for investiga tion". 8. All these provisions show that the investigation of an offence is also a proceed ing before the police officer under the Code of Criminal Procedure and there can be no reason for limiting the interpretation of the words used in Section 267, Cr. P. C. to the proceedings in the Court only. 9. For the sake of clarify and removal of doubts it may also be mentioned. P. C. to the proceedings in the Court only. 9. For the sake of clarify and removal of doubts it may also be mentioned. That the argument that the Magistrate cannot interfere in the investigation and, therefore, he should not pass any order under Section 267, Cr. P. C. during investigation also does not hold good. There are many provisions in the Cr. P. C. for providing assistance by the Magistrate in the inves tigation of the cases by the police. For example, a Magistrate under Section 82, Cr. P. C. can issue proclamation in respect of absconding accused; under Section 83, Cr. P. C. he can order for attachment of the property of the absconding accused, under Section 94, Cr. P. C. he can issue a warrant empowering the police to search any place, under Section 97, Cr. P. C. he can issue a warrant for a person wrongly confined, under Section 156 (1), Cr. P. C. he may per mit the investigation of a non-cognizance offence, under Clause (3) of this Section he may direct the police to register a case and to investigate, under Section 164, Cr. P. C. he can record statement and confession and can conduct test identification and under Section 167, Cr. P. C. he may remand the accused to judicial custody and even to the police custody for interrogation and recovery. All these powers can be exer cised on the request of the police officer investigating the offence and to aid and assist the investigation. The Magistrate can also order for inquiry by the police regarding any matter under Section 202, Cr. PC. and may also relcase the accused persons on bail during investigation under Section 437, Cr. P. C. All these provisions in the Cr. P. C. have been incorporated for providing assistance to the police in inves tigation under the supervision of the Magistrate. Similarly in a case where there is allegation against a person that he is in possession of stofen goods, which may be recovered on an interrogation, or the com plicity of certain persons in the crime can be ascertained by conducting test iden tification parade, there can be no reason as to wby the Magistrate cannot provide assistance to the police in calling the accused 10 the jail concerned if the person is detained in prison in some other District or State. Section 267, Cr. Section 267, Cr. P. C. provides remedy for such a situation for the assis tance by the Court for proper investigation of the crime and interrogation, recovery of stofen or incriminating articles etc. 10. For the above reasons, with great respect I think that the narrow interpreta tion of the words "other proceeding under this Code" as meaning only the proceeding in the Court is not a correct interpretation and the investigation of the offence by the police under Section 156, Cr. P. C. is also a proceeding under the Code and for that purpose a Magistrate can exercise power under Section 267, Cr. P. C. to issue an order in Form No. 36, if the person is detained in some other prison. 11. therefore, respectfully differ with The view taken by the Honble J. C. Gupta, J. in the above case and the toftowing point is referred to for the decision by the Division Bench "whether an order under Section 267, Cr. P (",. in Form No. 36of second schedule of Cr. P. C. can be issued on the request of the police during investigation of some offence, even if no inquiry or trial or proceedings are pending in the Court. " 12. Let the record be placed before the Honble The Chief Justice for nominating a Bench for the decision of the above question at an early date, as this question is of very vital importance for investigation of offences. 13. This petition shall be disposed of after the question is answered. Reference made. .