JUDGEMENT Rakesh Kumar and j. JJ. 1. Yesterday, when the case was called out, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner either to press this petition or to make a prayer for adjournment. However, as a last indulgence, the case was adjourned for a day with an indication that if on the next date, no one appears on behalf of the petitioner, the case shall be decided on the basis of materials available on the record of the case. 2. Today again, when the case was called out, none has come forward to press this petition. 3. While invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of order dated 25.8.1998 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in Misc. Case No.11 of 1998. By the said order, the learned Magistrate had directed to release a boy, namely, Guddu Kumar @ Babloo and hand over to the opposite party no.2. 4. I have examined the record of the present case. It is unfortunate that in paragraph-1, the petitioner had made a prayer for quashing of order dated 25.8.1998 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in Misc. Case No.11 of 1998, however, on the record, the said order was not at all placed by the petitioner. In absence of the impugned order, it is difficult for this Court to record any finding. In absence of the impugned order, there is no requirement to pass a positive order in favour of the petitioner and petition on this ground stands rejected. 5. Accordingly, this petition stands rejected.