IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.28418 of 2009 1. Ram Babu Choudhary, 2. Dhruw Shankar Choudhary @ Dhrub Shankar Prasad, Both sons of late Kamleshwari Choudhary, 3. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, son of late Biharilal Bhagat, All resident of village- Bhawanipur, Police station- Bhawanipur, district- Purnea at present resident of Dhamdaha North, Police station- Dhamdaha, district- Purnea. 4. Manish Kumar Jaiswal @ Manoj Kumar Jaiswal, son of Sri Shatrughan Prasad Choudhary, resident of Newalal Chowk, Shivnagar, Police station- Maranga, district Purnea. ……………… Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Nilam Devi W/o Chhote Lal Sah, village- Dhamdaha North, P.S- Dhamdaha District Purnea. …………….Opposite Parties ----------- 5. 21-06-2010 Heard both the sides. Petitioners have challenged the order dated 26.5.2009 passed by the Learned 1st Sessions Judge, Purnea, in Criminal Revision No. 22/2009, whereby the revision application filed by the petitioners has been dismissed. Petitioners were made accused of Dhamdaha P.S. case no. 141/07 instituted under diverse sections of the Penal Code including Section 364 I.P.C.. The investigating agency, upon conclusion of investigation, submitted final form whereby the petitioners herein were not sent up for trial. The Learned Magistrate on perusal of the materials on record including the case diary differed with the said report and took cognizance. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that earlier to filing of the present criminal proceeding, a criminal proceeding was 2 launched against the brother of the present informant under Section 376 I.P.C, with an allegation that he had committed rape on the daughter of the petitioner no. 1 Ram Babu Choudhary. This Court finds from the revisional order that the Learned Magistrate has personally gone through the case diary and after having found adequate materials emanating therefrom, the impugned order has been passed. Considering the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners and after going through the materials on record, this is satisfied that there is no illegality in the impugned order meriting interference. Application is dismissed. Fahad. Kishore K. Mandal, J)