IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.1962 of 2009 Bibi Sabila @ Sahabila, W/O Md. Sarvar Ali @ Paru, S/O Md. Ibrahim Ansari @ Makui Haji, R/O Vill.- Bhikhanpur Gumti No.- 3, P.S.- Isakchak, Distt.- Bhagalpur. ………….Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar ---------------------------------- 2. 19.12.2011 The complainant petitioner has preferred this revision application against the order dated 17.11.2009 passed by the learned S.D.J.M, Bhagalpur in Complaint Case No.775/2009 by which cognizance has not been taken against the accused 4, 5 and 6, Bhaishur, Gotani and Nanad respectively. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is sufficient material on the record to show that all the accused have committed the offence punishable under Section 498A of the I.P.C. and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, but the learned S.D.J.M h as found prima facie case against the accused 1, 2 & 3. The learned counsel for the State submits that there is no specific allegation against the accused 4, 5 & 6 as mentioned in the complaint petition. After hearing the learned counsel for the 2 petitioner and the learned counsel for the State and on perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the learned Magistrate has considered the complaint petition, Solemn Affirmation of the petitioner and also the evidence adduced on behalf of the petitioner as P.Ws. 1, 2, 3 & 4. After considering their evidence, the impugned order has been passed holding that a prima facie case is made out against the accused 1, 2 & 3 under Section 498 A of the I.P.C. and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and no prima facie case is made out and the allegation against rest accused 4, 5 and 6 does not appear to be correct. Considering the facts and circumstances stated above, I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order. This petition is dismissed. V.K. Pandey ( Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)