Judgment Ghanshyam Prasad, J. 1. Heard. 2. This application u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quashed the order of cognizance dated 19.7.2005 passed by Shri R.K. Prasad, Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur, Ara in complaint Case No. 389 (C) of 2004 thereby and thereunder cognizance under Secs. 341 and 323 Indian Penal Code, 1860 has been taken against the petitioner. 3. Petitioner was then Officer-in-Charge of Krishna Garh Barhara P.S. Submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the entire prosecution is bad and illegal and it has been filed with ulterior and oblique motive to wreck vengeance. The real fact is that on the alleged date of the occurrence, the house of the opposite party No. 2 was searched by the petitioner and others and huge quantity of illegal fire arms and other illegal articles were recovered. The father of the opposite party No. 2 and others were taken into custody. On the self statement of the petitioner. Krishna Garh Barhara P.S. No. 41 of 2004 was registered against the father and others of the opposite party No. 2. The opposite party No. 2 was also taken into custody for interrogation and after interrogation he was released on the same day (Annexures 2 and 3 series). 4. It is further submitted that on the complaint filed by the opposite party No. 2 in course of enquiry, the learned Magistrate called for report from the S.P., Ara. The S.P. submitted its report dated 27.8.2004 that the allegation was found urtrue and the complaint case was filed with ulterior motive. The father of the petitioner is a veteran criminal involved in several cases with serious nature. It is further submitted that the learned Magistrate without taking into account of the report (Annexure-5) has illegally taken cognizance. 5. From above facts, circumstances and documents referred to above, it also appears that the learned Magistrate has also acted in violations of provision of Sec. 202 Cr.P.C. sec. 202 Cr.P.C. is as follows: 202. It is further submitted that the learned Magistrate without taking into account of the report (Annexure-5) has illegally taken cognizance. 5. From above facts, circumstances and documents referred to above, it also appears that the learned Magistrate has also acted in violations of provision of Sec. 202 Cr.P.C. sec. 202 Cr.P.C. is as follows: 202. Postponement of issue of process.-(1) Any Magistrate, on receipt of a complaint of an offence of which he is authorised to take cognizance or which has been made over to him u/s. 192, may, if he thinks fit postpone the issue of process against the accused, and either inquire into the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by a police officer or by such other person as he thinks fit, for the purpose of deciding whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding: 6. It is quite clear from above provision that after postponement of issue of process either the Magistrate inquire into the case himself or direct the investigation by the Police Officer or such other person as he thinks fit. But he cannot adopt both the courses simultaneously. However, the Magistrate is quite competent to dis-agree with the report of the police and thereafter, he can take up enquiry himself. But before that he has no jurisdiction to make simultaneous inquiry into cases, it appears that the learned court below without taking into the account of the report of the S.P. has taken cognizance which is not justified in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. Apart from the above legal infirmities, it also appears that this case has been lodged by the opposite party No. 2 with ulterior motive to wreak vengeance against the petitioner as he filed a case against his father and other persons for illegal possession of fire arms. 8. Thus, having regard to the facts and circumstances, it is quite clear that the order in question is not justified and legal. Accordingly, this application is allowed and the order in question is hereby quashed.