JUDGMENT : The petitioners are aggrieved of the order dated 17.01.2018 by which cognizance of the offence under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B read with section 34 IPC has been taken and summons has been issued to them. 2. Various contentions have been raised on behalf of the petitioners; one of the contentions is that the complainant has suppressed the vital facts in the complaint petition and there are several civil litigations pending between the parties. 3. Under section 200 Cr.P.C the Magistrate can take cognizance of the offence on a complaint, however, if the Magistrate thinks fit, for the reasons to be recorded, issuance of process shall be postponed and the Magistrate shall cause an enquiry in the matter. For that purpose the Magistrate can himself cause an enquiry or seek a report from the police or any other such persons as he deem fit. By now it is well-settled that at this stage the accused has no locus to participate in the proceeding of a complaint case and, therefore, the court cannot consider the defence of the proposed accused (refer, “Chandra Deo Singh Vrs. Prokash Chandra Bose alias Chabi Bose and another” reported in AIR 1963 SC 1430 ). It is only after the complaint is not dismissed under section 203 Cr.P.C and the Magistrate has issued summons/warrant against the proposed accused under section 204 Cr.P.C, the accused person comes into picture. 4. Faced with this situation, Mr. Ashok Kr. Yadav, the learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw this quash-petition with liberty to the petitioners to raise all such plea which are available to the petitioners in law at the appropriate stage including the one of filing discharge-petition. 5. Accordingly, Cr. M.P. No. 3034 of 2018 is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners as prayed for.