IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.11256 of 2008 1. Ram Dutta Singh, son of Late Sant Lal Singh. 2. Shyam Kishore Singh @ Pappu. 3. Chandra Kishore Singh @ Munna. Both sons of Ram Dutta Singh. All residents of Village-Beyapur, P.S. Maner, District- Patna. ………………………………………………Petitioners. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. Chandra Bharti, daughter of Shiv Paswan, Varhipur, P.S. Maner, District-Patna. ……………………………………Opposite Parties. ---------------------------------- For the Petitioners : M/s. Bhola Prasad and M.K. Jha, Advocates. For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A.P.P. ------------------------------ 4. 7.9.2011. This application, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is for quashing the order dated 21.11.2007 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Danapur, Patna, in Complaint Case No.437(C) of 2007 summoning the accused-petitioners on inquiry finding prima facie case against them under Sections 323, 341, 447 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that prior to the filing of the present complaint case, 2 the court of Sri Sanjiv Singh, Executive Magistrate, Danapur, Patna, on the basis of the police report dated 27.11.2005, initiated a proceeding under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and passed a final order dated 22.2.2007 in Case No.409(M) 2005/T.R. No.56 of 2008, arising out of Non F.I.R. P.S. Case No.116 of 2005, only against the accused, Hardeo Rai, directing him to furnish bond of Rs.5000/- with two sureties of the like amount for a period of one year. It is also contended that only with a view to harass the petitioners, the complainant has filed this false complaint case. It has also been submitted that petitioner no.1 is a retired Government servant and petitioner no.2 is in service in the Indian Air Force whereas petitioner no.3 is an agriculturist. It appears from the impugned order dated 21.11.2007 that the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, on perusal of the complaint petition, S.A. of the complainant and the statements of the witnesses, finding prima facie case against the accused- petitioners under Sections 323, 341, 447 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code, ordered for summoning them. There is nothing in the impugned order dated 21.11.2007 to show the abuse of the process of the court. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed. However, the 3 petitioners would be at liberty to raise all the issues, raised herein, at the appropriate stage during the course of the trial. P.S. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J)