Raj Mohamad Miyan And ORS. v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.21140 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -56 Year- 2011 Thana -West Champaran Complaint DistrictWestchamparan(Bettiah) ===========================================================

1. Raj Mohamad Miyan Son of Late Bhulan Miyan.

2. Mansur Miyan

3. Imteyaz Alam @ Imteyaz

4. Manan Miyan All the son of Raj Mohamad Miyan

5. Rabina Khatoon @ Rabiya Khatoon daughter of Raj Mohamad Miyan

6. Rukhi Khatoon wife of Manan Miyan

7. Jokhani Khatoon wife of Raj Mohamad Miyan All the resident of village - Som Nagar Samota, Police Station - Sathi, District - West Champaran .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Nazama Khatoon daughter of Sarajul Miyan at present resident of village - Dhokaraha, Police Station - Ram Nagar, District - West Champaran .... .... Opposite Party/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 26-11-2015 The petitioners who are in-laws seek quashing of the order of cognizance dated 12.04.2013 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bagaha, West Champaran in Complaint Case No. C 56 of 2011, Tr. No. 5201 of 2013.

The case of the complainant is that she was married with Sadre Alam in 2009 but after marriage she was tortured on account of which she filed Complaint Case No. C-684 of 2009 which was pending trial. In the said complaint, Sadre Alam filed anticipatory bail

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21140 of 2014 dt.26-11-2015 2/2 in which as per the direction of the Court, the husband took his wife to the matrimonial house but all the accused persons assaulted her on account of which she filed the present complaint. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that it is evident that the dispute was between the husband and wife and the petitioners have no role to play.

On the last occasion notices had been issued the O.P. No. 2 but none appeared on her behalf.

Having gone through the material of the complaint petition I would be inclined to hold that the present proceeding deserves to be set aside. Hence the application is allowed and the order of cognizance dated 12.04.2013 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bagaha, West Champaran in Complaint Case No. C 56 of 2011, Tr. No. 5201 of 2013 is hereby set aside so far as the petitioners are concerned.

(Anjana Prakash, J) Prakash/- U T