JUDGEMENT Rakesh Kumar, J. 1. When the case was called out, no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner either to press this petition or to make a prayer for adjournment. 2. The sole petitioner, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in sum and substance, has prayed for quashing of the F.I.R. of Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 14 of 2000, registered under Sections 418, 120B and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. On perusal of the record, it appears that the said F.I.R. was lodged in view of the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate in Complaint Case No. 120 of 2000. Opp. Party No. 2 had filed a complaint vide Complaint Case No.120 of 2000 alleging therein that this petitioner had prepared a false injury report. The said complaint was referred to the police for its registration and investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and, accordingly, the F.I.R. i.e. Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 14 of 2000 was registered for the offences under Sections 418, 120B and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. On perusal of the F.I.R. the Court is satisfied that the cognizable offence is made out. I have also perused the entire petition. In the entire petition, there is no assertion as to whether after registering the F.I.R. the police submitted charge sheet and the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance or not. This indicates that on the date of filing of the present case, no proceeding was pending before the court below. In absence of pendency of any proceeding, it is difficult for this Court to exercise inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 5. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in the present petition and the petition stands rejected. 6. In the present case, on 21.11.2000, a Bench of this Court while issuing notice to Opp. Party no.2 had directed that in the meantime, further proceeding in Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 14 of 2000 dated 23.1.2000, so far the petitioner is concerned, shall remain stayed and the order of stay is continuing. 7. 6. In the present case, on 21.11.2000, a Bench of this Court while issuing notice to Opp. Party no.2 had directed that in the meantime, further proceeding in Kuchaikote P.S. Case No. 14 of 2000 dated 23.1.2000, so far the petitioner is concerned, shall remain stayed and the order of stay is continuing. 7. Keeping in view the fact that only F.I.R. was lodged and the order of stay remained operative for about 10 years, it is necessary to direct the concerned Superintendent of Police to take appropriate step so that investigation in Kuchaikote P.S. Case No.14 of 2000 may be completed as early as possible. 8. With above observation and direction, the petition stands rejected. 9. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Superintendent of Police, Gopalganj.