IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR.MISC. NO.38981 OF 2009 1. PINTU @ VIKAS KUMAR, SON OF ASHOK KUMAR 2. NEELAM DEVI @ NEELAM KUMARI, WIFE OF ASHOK KUMAR 3. PINKI KUMARI, DAUGHTER OF ASHOK KUMAR 4. CHHOTI KUMARI, DAUGHTER OF ASHOK KUMAR ALL RESIDENT OF MOHALLA NEW JAGANPURA, SUBHASH NAGAR, P.O. DHELWAN, POLICE STATION GAURICHAK, GOPALPUR OUTPOST, DISTRICT PATNA 5. PRITAM @ PRITAM KUMAR, SON OF SHRI AKHAURI BINOD BIHARIM AND SON-IN-LAW OF ASHOK KUMAR, RESIDENT OF H. NO. NY/113, AGANBARI KENDRA, PROFESSOR COLONY, JANTA ROAD, POLICE STTION GARDANIBAGH, DISTRICT PATNA ………………………………………………………………………….PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. PRAVIN KUMAR SINHA, SON OF SHRI SUDAMA PRASAD AMBASTH, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA SOUGH ASHOK NAGAR, POLICE STATION KANKARBAGH, DISTRICT PATNA …………………………………………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES ******** 2 08/12/2009 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 06.02.2008 by which the Court below has taken cognizance against them under Sections 323, 379 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegations levelled in the complaint petition are false and the complaint has been filed because of civil dispute. It is submitted that a title suit is pending between the parties with respect to a piece of land situated in between the house of the petitioners and the other side. The petitioners are claiming the land as their 2 own and were making constructions over it whereas the prosecution party was resisting the claim which allegedly led to the alleged occurrence. The Court below found that prima facie a case is made out under Sections 323, 379 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code but has rejected the claim that a case is made out under Sections 149 and 452 of the Indian Penal Code. I find that there is no illegality in the impugned order. This application is accordingly dismissed. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)