IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.36066 of 2007
RAJANTI DEVI, WIFE OF SUDAMA SINGH, DAUGHTER OF
SHANKAR PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SURWALA, POLICE
STATION TARWARA, DISTRICT SIWAN.
... ... PETITIONER.
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. SUDAMA SINGH, SON OF RAJESHWAR SINGH, RESIDENT OF
VILLAGE SURWALA, P.S. TARWARA, DISTRICT SIWAN.
3. RAJESHWAR SINGH, SON OF RAMDAT SINGH.
4. SARSWATI DEVI, WIFE OF RAJESHWAR SINGH.
5. BISWAKARMA SINGH, SON OF RAJESHWAR SINGH.
6. OM PRAKASH SINGH, SON OF RAJESHWAR SINGH.
7. BABITA DEVI, WIFE OF SUDAMA SINGH.
ALL ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SURWALA, P.S. TARWARA,
DISTRICT SIWAN.
8. ARJUN SINGH, SON OF CHANDRIKA SINGH, RESIDENT OF
VILLAGE UKHAI, POLICE STATION SIWAN, DISTRICT SIWAN.
... ... OPPOSITE PARTIES.
----
For the Petitioner : M/S Ram Chandra Singh, Adv.
Jitendra Kumar Singh,Adv.
For O.P. : Mr. Chandrakant, Adv.
For the State : Mrs.Indu Bala Pandey, A.P.P.
———–
11. 2.11.2010. The sole petitioner, who was
complainant before the court below, has
approached this Court with a prayer to direct
the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class,
Gopalganj to take cognizance for the offence
under Sections 406, 498A, 494/34 of the
Indian Penal Code. It has not been disputed
that learned Magistrate has taken cognizance
of offence under Section 323 of the Indian
Penal Code. In this case, earlier complaint
was filed by the sole petitioner against
opposite party nos.3 to 8 for an allegation
2
of commission of offence under Sections 406,
379, 498A, 494/34 of the Indian Penal code.
The only grievance, which has been
raised by Shri Ram Chandra Singh, learned
counsel for the petitioner is that despite
the fact that there were sufficient materials
before the learned Magistrate, he had taken
cognizance of offence only under Section 323
of the Indian Penal Code. It has been alleged
that the learned Magistrate was required to
take cognizance for other offences, which
were alleged in the complaint petition.
Shri Chandrakant, learned counsel has
appeared on behalf of some of the opposite
parties particularly husband of the
petitioner-complainant.
The court is of the opinion that the
grievance, which has been raised by the
learned counsel for the petitioner can well
be raised at an appropriate stage
particularly at the stage of charge. It is
expected that at the stage of charge, the
learned Magistrate will examine the materials
available on record in detail and thereafter,
he will pass appropriate order.
With above observation, the court is
3
of the opinion that it is not a fit case for
interfering at this stage.
Accordingly, the petition stands
disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to
raise all the points at the stage of charge.
( Rakesh Kumar,J.)
N.H./