RAKESH KUMAR, J.

(1) whether substitution is permissible with regard to complaint case as well as police case,

(2) if so, with regard to summons triable, warrant triable as well as sessions triable, and

(3) with regard to any other petition pending before the court of justice at the end of the party.

2. Aforesaid three questions are required to be answered by this Division Bench, since those questions have been referred to by the Hon’ble Single Bench for its adjudication by the Division Bench. Before proceeding to answer aforesaid questions, it would be apt to briefly state some fact of the case.

3. We have heard Sri Ramakant Sharma, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Nikhil Kumar Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Narendra Kumar Singh, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor.

4. Aforesaid two petitioners have approached this Court invoking its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’) against an order dated 07-07-2017 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna City (hereinafter referred to as the ‘A.C.J.M.’) in Shahjahapur P.S. Case No. 47 of 2016. By the said order,