A Magistrate cannot issue a non-bailable warrant against an accused in a complaint case before the stage of Section 204, Cr. P. C. is set in.

List has been revised. None appears for the com plainant, Sri Vimlesh Kumar learned counsel for the applicant is present.

2. By this application under Section 482, Cr. P. C. the applicant has prayed for quashing the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 127 of 1989 -Kailash Narain v. Ram Gopal Mittal, Police Station Auraia, pending in the court of Munsif Magistrate-lower criminal court, Etawah. 3. The facts giving rise to the present application, in brief, are as follows : The opposite party has filed a complaint under Sections 420 and 406, I. P. C. against the present applicant with the allegations that the accused-applicant was supplied on 13-2-1986 goods worth Rs. 33,682 and the money was not paid in spite of repeated promises. Thu case of the opposite party is that the accused had come to his Dal Mill on 11-2-1986 and he represented to him that he has a Dal Mill situated in Maharajganj, Patna and this was believed by the complainant opposite party. The accused-applicant brought a truck on 13-2-1986 at 11 a. m. and got the goods loaded in the said truck and when he was asked to make payment, he expressed that the money would be sent soon and that the goods will remain with him as Amanat. In spite of repeated contacts the money was not sent and ultimately the com plainant want to Mahrajganj but found that the applicant has no Dal Mill and had only a gaddi. When demand was made by the complainant from the applicant-accused to make payment the later again told him that he has not received the said money and would remit the amount soon. Again six months thereafter the complainant went to Patana at the Gaddi of the accused but he was fold that the Gaddi of the accused has been sold and now the accused does not come to that Gaddi. Again efforts were made by writing letters and even the complainant went personally but the accused always evaded, Ultimately the complainant asked the accused to return the goods but the accused neither returned the goods nor paid the money.

4. The ground taken by the applicant is that the complaint constitutes only a civil liability and not criminal liability. It is also alleged that the opposite party has examined only himself under Section 200, Cr. P. C. and no corroborative evidence under Section 200, Cr. P. C. has been adduced, and the learned Magistrate-lower criminal court has issued a non-bailable warrant against the applicant.

5. I have perused the record of the case. Counter affidavit has already been filed in this case. From Annexure No. 2 which is copy of the order-sheet of the lower criminal court, it is revealed that on 4-9- 1990 order issuing non-bailable warrant against the accused was passed. The order-sheet dated 13-11- 1990 goes to show that the accused was again absent. There is a men tion in the said order dated. 13- 11-1990 that the statement of the complainant was recorded under Section 200, Cr, P, C. but the complaiaaat has not produced any witness so far under Section 202, Cr. P. C. It is not clear from the respec tive affidavit and counter-affidavit of the parties and the order-sheet (Annexure No. *2) that the lower criminal Court Magistrate has issued any process after taking cognizance of the offence alleged in the complaint. The procedure with regard to complaint cases is provided in Chapter XXV. The Magistrate taking cognizance of the offence on a complaint has to examine the complainant on oath and the witnesses present, if any. If the Magistrate after recording the evidence under Section 200, Cr. P. C. on oath decides to proceed against the accused, he may either inquire into the case himself or direct an investiga tion to be made by a police officer or by such other person as he thinks fit under Section 202, Cr. P. C. for the purposes as to whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding. The scope of the enquiry under Section 202,, Cr. P. C. is limited only to the assertions of the complainant through the allegations made in the complaint. If the M