IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.15356 of 2008
1. SUSHMA DEVI WIFE OF PRABHU NIRANJAN KUMAR
GUPTA.
2. PRABHU NIRANJAN KUMAR GUPTA SON OF SRI OM
PRAKASH GUPTA.
BOTH RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE DIGHI, P.S. HAJIPUR,
DISTRICT VAISHALI (HAJIPUR).
... ... PETITIONERS.
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. SABITA DEVI WIFE OF SRI PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA
GUPTA AND SON OF SRI RAMESHWAR SAH
RESIDENT OF
-----------
2. 23.6.2010. No one appears on behalf of the petitioners.
Two petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction
of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, have prayed for quashing of the order dated 8.1.2007
passed by S.D.J.M., Chapra in Complaint Case No.2476 of 2005
whereby the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the
offences under Sections 498(A) and 323 of the Indian Penal Code
and directed to issue process to secure the attendance of the
accused persons including both the petitioners.
On perusal of the record, it transpires that petitioner
no.1 Sushma Devi was mother-in-law and petitioner no.2 Prabhu
Niranjan Kumar Gupta was father-in-law of the complainant. On
perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the learned
Magistrate, after conducting enquiry, had examined the entire
record and assigning a detailed reason had passed the order of
cognizance. The learned Magistrate, by the impugned order, has
not proceeded against some of the accused persons since there
were no sufficient material against them. The order of cognizance
2
is a reasoned order and suffers from no error.
Accordingly, I do not find any material to exercise
inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure in favour of the accused persons and the
petition stands rejected.
Md.S. ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)