← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./4638/2015dismissed

Md. Faruk Azam @ Md. Farooqu And ORS. v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-01-23Mr. Justice Rajendra Kumar Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.4638 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -964 Year- 2012 Thana -AURANGABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- AURANGABAD ======================================================

1. Md. Faruk Azam @ Md. Farooqu Son of Late Amzad Ali

2. Noor Jahan Wife of Md. Faruk Azam

3. Md. Jasim Ali @ Majar Son of Md. Faruk Azam All are resident of Mohalla - Mangolpuri, House No-220, P.S- Mangolpuri, Old Delhi, Pin110083. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Nikhat Praveen Wife of Md. Basim Resident of Village - Hazipur Gola, Ward No-2, P.S- Raffiganj, District - Aurangabad. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeshwar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Bihari Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 23-01-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

This application has been filed for quashing of the order dated 12.08.2013 passed in Complaint Case No. 964/12/ Trial No. 1733 of 2014 by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad summoning the accused including the petitioners, on enquiry under Section 204 Cr. P. C. finding primafacie case under Section 498 (A) of the Indian Penal Code. Submission is that the petitioners are father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law of the Complainant- Opposite Party No. 2 and they have been falsely implicated in this case by the Complainant-Opposite Party No. 2 without specific allegation.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.4638 of 2015 (2) dt.23-01-2017 2/2 On going through the impugned order, I find no illegality amounting to abuse of the process of the Court. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed. However, the petitioners would be at liberty to raise all the points, as raised herein, at the appropriate stage in the Trial Court. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Sudha/- U T