IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.168 of 2008 1. DINA RAM, S/O LATE BHAGIRATH RAM, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE & P.S. NEEPNAGAR, DISTRICT Nalanda 2. JITENDRA KUMAR @ JITENDRA PRASAD, S/O LATE BABULAL 3. REENA DEVI, W/O JITENDRA KUMAR @ JITENDRA PRASAD BOTH, SERIAL NOS. 2 & 3, ARE RESIDENTS OF MOHALLA BHURA GALI, STATION ROAD, BAKHTIYARPUR, P.S. BAKHTIYARPUR, DISTRICT, PATNA .. PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. RAJENDRA PRASAD, S/O LATE HEMANT RAM, E/O MOHALLA NAISARAI, P.S. BIHARSHARIF, DISTRICT NALANDA .. OPPOSITE PARTIES **** /4/ 28.04.2010 Heard the counsel for the parties. 2. This application is directed against the order, dated 12.10.2007, by which, after submission of the supplementary charge sheet, has issued summons to the petitioners. From the impugned order, itself, it appears that earlier charge sheet was submitted against the accused persons keeping the investigation pending against the six accused persons and cognizance was taken under Sections 304B, 201 and 498A/34 of the Penal Code. However, out of six persons, charge sheet submitted against three persons and, hence, on 05.07.2007 the learned Magistrate found that there are prima facie evidence against these petitioners and ordered to transfer the case. 2 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners, however, contends that the allegation in the complaint against the petitioners is omnibus and in the case diary also there is no sufficient material. The petitioner no. 1 is the brother-in-law of the husband of the deceased and petitioners 2 and 3 are sister-in- law and daughter of petitioner no. 1. However, there is allegation in the complaint that all accused persons, including these petitioners, demanded dowry and subjected to cruelty and the deceased has been done to death. However, there are allegation against the petitioners in the complaint case and Magistrate after due consideration of the material on record ordered to issue summons after taking cognizance that prima facie case is made out at the stage and the opinion of the Magistrate which shall prevail. However, if the petitioners so deem may raise the issue at the stage of framing of the charge the Court below and the Court below shall consider it in accordance with law at the stage of framing of charge. 4. Hence, this application is dismissed. S.A. ( Gopal Prasad, J. )