IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.52529 of 2008 1. Jitendra Paswan 2 Rajiv Paswan , both son of Manju Ram R/o village Bari Kewai, P.S. Shahjahanpur, District Patna ……..Petitioners. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Jain Paswan @ Jaggan Paswan son of late Siya Sharan Paswan R/o village Bari Kewai,P.s. Sahjahanpur Dist. Patna …………..opposite parties. ------- For the petitioners: Mrs. Nirmala Kumari, Advocate Mr. Purnendu Nr. Singh, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhaya,A.P.P. -------- 2 23.11.2011 The petitioners have approached this Court under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the order dated 2.6.2008 passed by Shri D. Ram, J.M. Patnacity in complaint case No. 892 of 2007 whereby three accused including the petitioners have been summoned on an inquiry finding the case made out under section 323, 504 and 427 of the Indian penal Code. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that pappu Paswan who was also named in the complaint petition has lodged a case i.e. Shahjahanpur P.S. Case no. 34 of 2007 under section 341, 323, 435/379 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and due to that reason the complainant O.P. no.2 has lodged the complaint case on the basis of false and concocted allegation only to harass the petitioners. It appears from the perusal of impugned order dated 2.6.2008 that the learned Judicial Magistrate on perusal of the complaint petition, S.A. of the complainant and the statement of the witnesses arrived at conclusion that prima facie case under 2 section 323, 504 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code is made out only against the three accused Jitendera Paswan, Pappu Paswan and Rajiv Paswan out of seven accused named in the complaint petition. There is nothing in the impugned order to show the illegality and misuse of process of the court. As far as submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners regarding false implication of the accused petitioners due to lodging of Sahjahanpur P.S. Case no.34 of 2007 by Pappu Paswan named as accused in complaint petition is concerned this is the defence of accused petitioners and that could not been considered at the time of summoning the accused on enquiry, under section 204 Cr.P.C. Accordingly application is dismissed. M.Rahman (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J)