ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned counsel for the State. 2. This quashing application is filed for quashing of order of cognizance dated 19.02.2008 passed by the learned C.J.M., Samastipur in connection with Kalayanpur P.S. Case No. 172 of 2006 and G.R. No. 2120 of 2006. 3. Petitioner along with others is alleged for causing assault by means of lathi and fersa even with intention to kill causing fracture of the hand. Submission is that petitioner was in peaceful possession of a room purchased from Dr. Ram Gulam Mahto, its real owner. That wrongly was claimed by informant party, for that only occurrence took place, so it can be taken as right to defence for property. His further submission is that final form is submitted in the case. 4. It cannot be disputed that Magistrate is empowered to take cognizance differing the opinion of investigating officer, as is done in this case. Now, the point to consider to doubt the prosecution case is that case falls under right to private defence to save the property. It is case of the petitioner himself that the room was claimed by the informant also and that is only cause for the incident in which assault is caused alleged and corroborated. So, I find no mistake committed by the learned Magistrate to interfere to quash the order passed by him. 5. Accordingly, the quashing application is dismissed. 6. Let the order be communicated through Fax at the cost of the Opposite Party No.2 in the Court of C.J.M., Samastipur in connection with G.R. No. 2120 of 2006 arising out of Kalayanpur P.S. Case No. 172 of 2006.