Ramesh Kumar Singh And ANR v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.5545 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -4087 Year- 2013 Thana -VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE DistrictVAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================

1. Ramesh Kumar Singh son of Vasist Singh

2. Vandana Devi @ Sobha Devi wife of Ramesh Kumar Singh, resident of village-Chakmida, P.O-Sinduari, P.S-Sadar, District-Vaishali .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Nilu Kumari wife of Vijay Kumar, resident of village- Rasulpur Turki, P.S-Bhagwanpur, P.O-Asoi, District-Vashali. At present daughter of Vishwanath Singh, resident of village-Rajapakar (Kushwaha Tola) P.SRajpakar, District-Vaishali. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan No.II, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Upendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-08-2015 In the instant application filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Code"), the petitioners seek quashing of the order dated 25.4.2014 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur in Complaint Case No.4087 of 2013 whereby the learned Magistrate has summoned the petitioners to face trial for the offences punishable under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code as well as sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. From perusal of the impugned order dated 25.4.2014 it would appear that the learned Magistrate has summoned the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.5545 of 2015 (3) dt.05-08-2015 2/2 petitioners after taking into consideration the statement of the complainant on oath and the statements of the witnesses examined in course of enquiry under section 202 of the Code. In the present application neither the statement of the complainant nor the statements of the witnesses examined in course of enquiry has been brought on record. In absence of those documents, I find it difficult to adjudicate this application on merit.

In that view of the matter, the application is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to file another application in the same subject matter after bringing on record all the relevant documents on the basis of which the learned Magistrate passed the impugned order.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) Md.S./- U T