IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.46913 of 2007 1. Arun Kumar. 2. Manoj Prasad @ Manoj Kumar Gupta. 3. Sonu Prasad. All sons of Radhe Shyam Prasad. 4. Manorma Devi W/O Radhe Shyam Prasad. 5. Radhe Shyam Prasad, S/O Late Phulchan Sao. All resident of Mohalla- Kila, P.S. Sasaram(T), District- Rohtas. -------Petitioners. -Versus- 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Sita Ram Prasad, S/O Late Ram Narayan Sah, resident of Village and P.S. –Akorhi Gola, District- Rohtas. -----Opposite Parties. ----------- 3. 27.01.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, the State and for the opposite party no.2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 3.8.2006 taking cognizance under Section 304(B) of the Penal Code. Learned counsel submits that 40 days after death of the deceased, an F.I.R. was lodged registered as Akorhigola P.S. Case No. 3 of 2003 under Sections 304(B),201 and 498A of the Penal Code. The police after investigation submitted final form that the deceased died of an accidental fire. Nine months after the submission of the final form a complaint case no. 834 of 2004 came to be lodged under Section 304B of the Penal Code. The onus under Section 304B, contrary to the general principle of the criminal law that an accused is presumed innocent unless found to be guilty, shifts on the accused under the aforesaid Section. Whether the deceased died of an accidental fire or otherwise - 2 - are issues which can appropriately be considered in the trial itself. Mere submission of a final form does not invalidate cognizance taken after enquiry. The two are different issues. To this Court, under the provision of Penal Code when the onus shifts on the accused, mere delay, as sought to be urged on behalf of the petitioners, is not a sufficient ground to interfere in exercise of powers under Section 428 of Cr.P.C. The application is dismissed. U.K. (Navin Sinha,J)