CRIMINAL MISCELLANIOUS No.31818 OF 2006 * * * * * ( In the matter of an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ) * * * * * 1.AKHILESH CHAUDHARY, Son of Late Shivnath Chaudhary 2.RENU DEVI, Wife of Akhilesh Chaudhary Resident of Village Kaddhariya, Police Station Mahua, District Vaishali. ……….Petitioners Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SHIV NATH RAM, Son of Late Kamal Ram, Resident of Village Kaddhariya, P.S. Mahua, District Vaishali. ……..Opposite Parties For the Petitioners :- Smt. Asha Devi, Advocate For the Opposite Party No. 2 :- Shri Damodar Pd. Tiwary, A.P.P. For the State :- Shri Amarendra Prasad, Advocate * * * * * P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHILESH CHANDRA * * * * * Akhilesh Chandra, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Additional Public prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2. 2. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking quashing of order dated 17.04.2006 passed by Shushri Sangita, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hajipur, Vaishali in Complaint Case No. C.I. 1993 of 2005/ Trial No. 1359 of 2006, taking cognizance for the offence under Sections 323/427 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3 (I) (XV) of the Schedule Caste & Schedule Tribe (Prevention of 2 Atrocities Act). 3. Admittedly, opposite party no. 2 filed a complaint case against the petitioners alleging trespass over a hut belonging to him and during that course causing some assault and other nuisances with the family members. 4. It is pointed out that with respect to a piece of land, there are other criminal proceedings between the parties under Sections 107 & 188 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also recommendation for an order under Section 146 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has also been made by the investigating agencies. No doubt, recommendations were against opposite party no. 2, but taking into consideration the enimical terms between the parties. At this stage it cannot be said that petitioners might not have committed any crime as alleged. However, petitioners are given liberty to agitate all their points before the trial court at appropriate stage, preferably at the time of hearing on the point of charge. The court below shall consider the prayer on its own merit without being prejudiced of instant order of non-interference in order taking cognizance. With the above observation, this application stands disposed of. Patna High Court Dated : 19th November, 2010 Praveen/- N.A.F.R. (Akhilesh Chandra, J.)