IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR.MISC. NO.40339 OF 2009 1. TARPIN YADAV, SON OF SHRI BAHADUR YADAV 2. GUDAR YADAV, SON OF SHRI SARYUG YADAV BOTH ARE THE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MAHUA, POLICE STATION NIRMALI, DISTRICT SUPAUL ……………………………………………………………………….PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. REKHA DEVI, WIFE OF BRIJ LAL YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MAHUWA, POLICE STATION NIRMALI, DISTRICT SUPAUL …………………………………………………………………….OPPOSITE PARTIES ******** 2 15/02/2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioners have filed this application challenging the order dated 15.09.2009 by which the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Birpur, Supaul has taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 376/511 & 379 of the Indian Penal Code in Nirmali Police Station Case No. 25 of 2009. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that after investigation, the police has found the case to be false. It is submitted that apart from the informant, there are no other witnesses to support the occurrence. The cause of this false implication, according to the learned Counsel for the petitioners, is that there are several litigations pending between the parties which had led to criminal cases being filed by the informant. The Investigating Officer of this case has 2 submitted Final Form in which there is comment that it is a case of false implication. The Court has deferred with the finding of the Investigating Officer because according to the Court below the informant and some other witnesses support the prosecution version. The points raised on behalf of the petitioners can be raised during trial where the petitioners would have the liberty to show previous enmity as the reason of false implication in a case of this nature. This application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)