CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19587 OF 2007 --------- In the matter of an application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. --------- 1.SANTOSH TIWARI @ SANTOSH 2.Alok Tiwari Both sons of Triloki Tiwari 3.Triloki Tiwari son of late Ram Bilash Tiwari 4.Smt. Bir Bala Tiwari wife of Triloki Tiwari All residents of village Mohiuddi Nagar, P.S.-Chowk, Dist.-Samastipur (Bihar) …… ……..Petitioners Versus 1.STATE OF BIHAR 2.Shubhra Tiwari daughter of Ramesh Shukla resident of Mohalla-L.I.C.Colony, West Bailey Road, Raghunath Path, P.S.-Danapur, Dist.-Patna. ……. …….Opp. Parties For the petitioners: None For Opp.Party No.2: Mr.V.K.M. Tripathy For the State: Mr.Umesh Lal Verma,A.P.P. --------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR -------- Rakesh Kumar,J. On 29.10.2010 none appeared on behalf of the petitioners on call of the case while. Mr. Vinay Kant Mani Tripathy learned counsel for opposite party no.2 was present. However, the case was adjourned for the day with an indication that no further adjournment shall be granted. While adjourning the case it was noticed that in the case interim order of stay was continuing since long. Today, again on call of the case none appeared on behalf of the petitioners either to press this petition or to make a prayer for adjournment. Mr. Vinay Kant Mani Tripathy learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as Mr.Umesh Lal Verma learned counsel for the State are present. 2. Four petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal 2 Procedure, have prayed for quashing of an order dated 18.2.2006 passed by learned Sub.Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Danapur, in Complaint Case No.222C of 2005. By the said order the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences under sections 406 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2 submits that from the averments made in the complaint petition itself specific case is made out against all the accused persons. It has further been submitted that after conducting enquiry the learned Magistrate has rightly taken cognizance of the offences as mentioned above. Mr. Umesh Lal Verma, learned counsel for the State supports the stand which has been taken by learned counsel for opposite party no.2. 4. Besides hearing learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and the State, I have also perused the contents of the complaint petition as well as the impugned order. After going through the materials available on the record, the court is of the opinion that the learned Magistrate while passing the impugned order has committed no error. I do not find any merit in the present petition and the petition stands rejected. 5. In view of rejection of this petition, interim order of stay stands automatically vacated. Let a copy of this order be sent to the court below forthwith. Patna High Court The 2nd November,2010 Md.S./NAFR ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)