IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.21866 of 2007 ***** 1. Kapil Deo Mehta son of Lakhan Mahto @ Ram Lakhan Mahto, 2. Malti Devi W/o Kapildeo Mehta Both resident of Mohalla-Ram Lakhan Colony, Musallahpur, Rampur Lane, P.S.- Sultanganj, District-Patna. …. …. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Shivani Mehta @ Rinki Kumar W/o Ashish Mehta, D/o Surendra Prasad, resident of Mohalla-Musallahpur Hat, Rampur Lane, P.S.-Sultanganj, District-Patna at present residing at Mohalla-Lohanipur, P.S. Kadam Kuan, District-Patna. …. …. Opposite parties ----------- 4. 18.5.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. With the allegations made in the complaint, the basic offence as alleged therein, prima facie, case is made out. If that is so then there is nothing wrong with the order taking cognizance. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that there is no specific allegation against petitioner no. 1, father-in-law, whatever is alleged is against petitioner no.2, mother-in-law or the husband. The Court is not satisfied with the said submission because the complaint has to be read in its entirety and it cannot be said that there is nothing alleged whatsoever against the petitioner no.1 though something more is alleged against petitioner no.2. This Court, therefore, is not satisfied that a case for interference under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure is made out. The application stands dismissed. Pawan/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)