JUDGEMENT Akhilesh Chandra, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. Supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner. 3. This is an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking quashing of order dated 18.12.2002 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur in Tilakmanjhi Bhagalpur P.S. Case No. 113/2002, non-First Information Report Case No. 02/2002, taking cognizance for the offences under Section 182, 211 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner. 4. Admittedly, at the instance of the petitioner Kotwali P.S. Case No. 446/2001 under Section 341, 342, 323, 379, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code was instituted wherein police after investigation not only submitted final form but also recommended action to be taken against informant under Section 182, 211 of the Indian Penal Code for which separate prayer was to be made. 5. The Petitioner filed protest petition against such submission on final form but after hearing not only the final form was accepted but by same order dated 16.11.2001, the protest complaint was also refused giving rise to criminal revision No. 542/2002 before learned Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur, which ultimately appears allowed, vide order dated 07.05.2003, passed by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur, to the extent that court below was directed to record statement of the complainant and witnesses and thereafter pass appropriate order treating the protest petition as a complaint case. 6. In view of the above Complaint Case No. C677/2003 was instituted wherein after examining the witnesses and other materials vide order dated 08.08.2003 cognizance was taken for the offences alleged. 7. Against the above order dated 08.08.2003, accused persons there preferred Criminal Miscellaneous No. 27523/2003 before this Court seeking quashing of the order with a liberty to raise their points at appropriate stage before appropriate forum, the same appears dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 12.05.2004. 8. No doubt, before taking cognizance for the offences against the accused persons named in Kotwali P.S. Case No. 466/2001, was taken, in pursuance of protest complaint petition, the court blow took cognizance for the offence under Section 182, 211 of the Indian Penal Code which is under challenge here. 9. Once the court of competent jurisdiction finding prima facie case against the accused persons for the offences, the case was instituted earlier but police submitted final form. 9. Once the court of competent jurisdiction finding prima facie case against the accused persons for the offences, the case was instituted earlier but police submitted final form. It cannot be said that the informant petitioner had no reason to get the case instituted and he is liable for the prosecution as recommended under Section 182, 211 of the Indian Penal Code. 10. In view of the above, if the impugned order and the proceeding of Tilakmanjhi Bhagalpur P.S. Case No. 113/2002 non-F.I.R. Case No. 02/2002 is permitted to continue, it shall be nothing but abuse of the process of law and sheer wastage of precious judicial time. 11. Accordingly, the impugned order is hereby quashed and this application stands allowed.