IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.22212 of 2010 SANTOSH KUMAR CHAUDHARY S/O SRI TAJ NARAYAN CHAUDHARY, R/O VILLAGE- RAMPUR JALALPUR, P.S. DALSINGSARAI, DISTRICT- SAMASTIPUR. ………….Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. RAM KEDAR CHAUDHARY S/O NEPALI CHAUDHARY 3. MUKUL CHAUDHARY S/O RAM KEDAR CHAUDHARY 4. SANJEEV CHAUDHARY S/O RAM KEDAR CHAUDHARY 2 TO 4 R/O VILLAGE- RAMPUR JALALPUR, P.S.- DALSINGSARAI, DISTT. SAMASTIPUR …………..Opposite Parties ----------- 2. 09.03.2011 Heard the parties. The petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 13.4.2010 passed in Criminal Rev. No. 705 o of 2009, by which the Sessions Judge, Samastipur has affirmed the order dated 2.2.2009 passed by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Delsingsarai in T. R. No. 15.3/09, by which he has taken cognizance under Section 341, 323, 326, 337, 504/34 I.P.C. and not under Section 307 I.P.C. even though in the facts of the case such an offence was made out. This application is being disposed off with a direction to the Trial Court to consider at the appropriate stage whether an offence under Section 307 I.P.C. is also made out against the accused persons. With these observations, the application is disposed off. Fahad. ( Anjana Prakash, J. )