IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.29813 of 2008 1. Ashok Tiwari @ Ashok Kumar Tiwari 2. Sitaram Tiwari 3. Sawitri Devi…………..Petitioners. Versus State Of Bihar & Anr ---------------------------------- 03. 28.09.2011 This is an application for quashing the order of cognizance dated 27.3.2008 passed by learned S.D.J.M., Muzaffarpur in Complaint Case No.64 of 2008 (Trial No.1749 of 2008) filed by the Opposite Party No.2 for the offences under Sections 498A, 323, 379 of the I.P.C. and Section 3 /4 of the D.P. Act through which the learned S.D.J.M., Muzaffarpur has been pleased to take cognizance of offences under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 /4 of D.P.Act against the petitioners. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. Learned counsel for the informant is also present. Marriage is of the year 2002, allegation is that at the time of ‘Gauna’ (Second marriage) a demand was made of motorcycle and Rs.50,000/- cash, anyhow, Bidai was possible, on reaching Sasural, in laws including petitioners started to torture for non-fulfilment of demand. On 22.9.2004, a written petition was given to Officer-in- Charge, Maker Police Station, but no consequence either towards action by the police or torture, which was being caused upon the complainant and that remained continued in different ways even she was poured kerosene oil and attempt was made to set her on fire, but running from the place, she saved herself and went to her maika. Matter was taken up by his brother and others. Further it is said that she was taken to matrimonial home by the husband, but was again ousted just after 2 reaching her matrimonial home. There is some admitted fact in the case that for the incident till 22.9.2004, police was informed and now it has come in picture that Maker P. S. Case No.39 of 2004 was lodged, charge sheet was submitted and matter is under trial and for the same offence present Complaint Case No.54 of 2008 is filed, but not within the jurisdiction of Chapra Court where the F.I.R. was lodged rather at Muzaffarpur. Legal and factual position is that in the case instituted otherwise than on police report (Complaint Case), it is made appeared to the Magistrate, during the course of enquiry or trial held by him, that an investigation by the police is in progress in relation to the offence, which is subject matter of the enquiry or trial held by him, the Magistrate shall stay the proceeding and in case, a report is submitted under section 173 of the Cr.P.C. and cognizance is taken by Magistrate, the Magistrate shall enquire into or try together the Complaint Case and the case arising out of the police report as if both the cases where instituted on a police report. In case in hand, complaint is filed in a Court at Muzaffarpur, so it is proper to transfer the instant case that is Complaint Case No.64 of 2008, Tr. No.1749 of 2008 from the S.D.J.M., Muzaffarpur in the Court of Mr. R. K. Srivastava, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Chapra. Before ending, it is made clear that S.D.J.M., Muzaffarpur was never informed about pendency of a case at Chapra though complaint petition is clear that police was informed about the incident taken place in the year 2004. There appears some contradiction in both 3 the cases that also will be taken into consideration by the Trial Magistrate in reaching the final conclusion by believing or disbelieving the allegation. In the result, this quashing application is allowed in part, Complaint Case No.64 of 2008 pending in the Court of S.D.J.M., Muzaffarpur is hereby ordered to be transferred in the Court of Mr. R. K. Srivastava, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Chapra for its trial and disposal along with Maker P. S. Case No.39 of 2004, G.R. No.3039 of 2004. Vikash ( Mandhata Singh, J.)