JUDGMENT 1. - By way of instant revision petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner seeks to quash the First Information Report No. 253/2000 dated 7.8.2000 Police Station, Makrana District Nagaur for offence under Section 467, 468, 471, 420, 469 and 120-B I.P.C. 2. It is alleged that the quarry licence held by the petitioner is illegal and forged for the reason that he made some over writings in the licence and thereby made Mine No. 206 as Mine No. 204. It is further alleged that on the licence, the signatures of Mining Engineer is forged and there is no record in the Mining Department. It is also alleged that carbon copy of the Mine licence available in the Mining Office and the licence possessed by the petitioner do not tally and even the said copy does not bear the signatures of Mining Engineer. Some more allegations have been made in the complaint. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has brought to my notice that investigation is over and the charge-sheet is ready for filing before the competent court. 4. Mr. Anand Purohit, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that charge-sheet was filed on 2.5.2002 but it was not accepted by the Magistrate as there was a stay from this court. It is further submitted that contempt proceedings deserves to be initiated against the officer concerned for continuing the investigation and filing the charge-sheet in defiance of interim order by this court. 5. It appears that investigation commenced on filing of F.I.R. on 7.8.2000. Instant petition for quashing of First Information Report was presented on 29.10.2001 i.e., after more than one year. This court by order dated 20.11.2001 stayed further proceedings in F.I.R. No. 253/2000. By order 10 dated 22.4.2002, interim relief was made limited to the next date of hearing. The order reads as under: "Interim order, if any, to continue till then." 6. The petition was placed before this court on 16.5.2002 and it was adjourned beyond vacation. It was further adjourned on 2.7.2002, 30.7.2002, is 5.8.2002 and 13.8.2002. On 28.8 2002, the court adjourned the case to 5.9.2002, and directed to continue the interim order till next date. Said order reads as under: "Put up on 5.9.2002 as prayed. Interim order to continue till then." 7. It was further adjourned on 2.7.2002, 30.7.2002, is 5.8.2002 and 13.8.2002. On 28.8 2002, the court adjourned the case to 5.9.2002, and directed to continue the interim order till next date. Said order reads as under: "Put up on 5.9.2002 as prayed. Interim order to continue till then." 7. In fact, there was no interim order existing on 28.8.2002, as such, there was no question of continuing interim order. Be that as it may, similar order was passed on 5.9.2002, 26.9.2002, 4.10.2002, 21.10.2002 and 29.10.2002 to continue interim relief, if any, till next date. The matter was again listed on 12.11.2002, 21.11.2002, 27.11.2002, 2.12.2002 and 13.12.2002. On all these days, the petition was adjourned without any order for interim relief. On 14.1.2003, the main petition was directed to be listed for hearing on 23.1.2003 for final disposal. The case was again adjourned on 23.1.2003, 6' 2003, 11.2.2003, 20.2.2003 and 6.3.2003. Thereafter, it has been listed in court on number of dates. Thus, on 20.1.2004, the matter was heard and was kept for dictation of order on the same day. However, it was submitted that matter will be argued by senior counsel on the next date. A request was made to adjourn the case to 5.2.2004 which was declined. Thus, the fact remains that pursuant to impugned F.I.R., investigation has commenced. Petitioner was arrested and released on bail on 3.3.2001. Police has collected the evidence and concluded the investigation. 8. The pace under Section 154 and 156 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has statutory right to investigate a cognizable offence without requiring the sanction of court. So long as the Investigating Officer making investigation independently without the assistance of court, it is not within the powers of the High Court in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to interfere with the investigation in collection of evidence. The Apex Court has carved out certain exceptions wherein this court in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure may quash the F.I.R. However, in a case where on filing of F.I.R., investigation has commenced, evidence has been collected, I fail to understand what remains for quashing of FI.R. After collection of evidence, police is required to draw conclusion either to file charge-sheet or to forward a Final Report. It if for the court to take cognizance of the offence on the basis of the material collected in case the charge-sheet is filed. Similarly, in so case the Final Report is forwarded, it is for the court to accept or not to accept the same. The accused get an opportunity to convince the court if he should be put to trial on the allegations made in the FI.R. and the material collected during investigation. 9. In spite of the fact that there was no stay on further investigation by this court after May, 2002, the police under the garb of pendency of instant petition, has not been allowed to discharge its statutory duty. It is abuse of process of court. 10. No case is made out for invoking the inherent powers of this court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 11. Consequently, the misc. petition stands dismissed.Petition Dismissed. *******