IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55341 of 2016 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-204 Year-2014 Thana- AURANGABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Vijay Singh son of late Parmanand Singh Moh-Dasratha, P.S.-Beur in the town and district of Patna ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Officer I/C Aurangabad P.S.- Aurangabad 3. Ashok Singh son of not kown Karma Road, P.S.- Aurangabad, Distt.- Aurangabad 4. Nishant Kumar, Branch Manager, LandT Finance Co. 304, 3rd floor, Grond Palza, Dakbunglow More, P.S.- Kotwali, Distt.- Patna 5. Rohit Kumar, Collection Agent, LandT Finance Co, 304, 3rd floor, Grond Palza, Dakbunglow More, P.S.- Kotwali, Distt.- Patna 6. Manoj Singh, Collection Agent, LandT Finance Co. 304, 3rd floor, Grond Palza, Dakbunglow More, P.S.- Kotwali, Distt.- Patna 7. Rajesh Singh Recovery Agent, LandT Finance Co. 304, 3rd floor, Grond Palza, Dakbunglow More, P.S.- Kotwali, Distt.- Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Renu Jha, Adv For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 4 28-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner in the present case has prayed for quashing the order dated 11.04.2016 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad in Complaint Case No. 204 of 2014 by which the said complaint has been dismissed in exercise of power under Section 203 of Cr.P.C. The operative portion of the impugned order dated 11.04.2016 is quoted hereinbelow for needful:- Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55341 of 2016(4) dt.28-07-2026 2/2 “vfHkys[k ij miyC/k tkap lkekxzh ds voyksdu ls ifjokn i= esa ukfer vfHk;qDrksa ds fo:) ifjokn i= esa of.kZr HkkŒ nŒ foŒ dh /kkjk 380] 392] 324] 327] 386 @34 esa izFke n`’V;k dksbZ ekeyk curk gqvk izrhr ugha gks jgk gS vkSj u rks ifjokn i= esa ukfer vfHk;qDrx.k ds fo:) mDr /kkjkvksa esa vkijkf/kd dk;Zokgh pykus gsrq vfHkys[k ij myC/k lkexzh gh miyC/k gSA orZeku ifjokn i= ekeyk nhokuh izd`fr dk ekeyk izrhr gksrk gSA vr% orZeku ifjokn ekeyk dks nŒ izŒ lŒ dh /kkjk 203 ds vUrxZr xq.k&nks’k ij [kkfjt fd;k tkrk gSA” 3. It is by now well settled that against the order passed under Section 203 Cr.P.C. rejecting a complaint, a criminal revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C. is maintainable and not a quashing application under Section 484 Cr.P.C. Since this case relates to the year 2016, therefore, it would not be in the interest of justice to dismiss this case outrightly as not maintainable. 4. The petitioner is permitted to convert this quashing application into a criminal revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C. within two weeks from today. If this case has been converted into a criminal revision, let it be placed before an appropriate Bench. kiran/- (Alok Kumar Sinha, J) U T