IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.45551 of 2008 1. Md.Shibli, Son of Sheikh Salim. 2. Md. Shakil, Son of Sheikh Salim. 3. Md. Afroz @ Guddu, Son of Sheikh Salim. 4. Sheikh Salim, Son of Md. Kallu. 5. Bibi Kahkashan Bano @ Usha, Wife of Md. Shibli. 6. Bibi Sairun, Wife of Sheikh Salim. 7. Bibi Roohi, Wife of Sheikh Salim. All residents of Mohalla Barehpura, Near the Chhoti Railway line, PS Ishaqchak, District Bhagalpur ----- Petitioners Versus The State Of Bihar ----- Opposite Party For the State : Mr. P.K. Chaurasia, A.P.P. ----------- 2 4.8.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State. Learned counsel for the petitioners points out initially the case was under Sections 498A/34, 323/34, 307 of the Indian Penal Code and ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act. While considering the application under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No. IV, Bhagalpur came to the conclusion that no offence is made out under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, and as such, the case was not triable by a Court of Sessions. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as per the provisions of Section 228 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, if the 2 Court after considering and hearing the counsel, comes to the conclusion that the case is not triable by the Court of Sessions, he may frame charge against the accused and by order transfer the case for trial to the Chief Judicial Magistrate or any other Court. It is further submitted that instead adopting this procedure, the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No. IV, Bhagalpur, sent the case directly to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur. It is submitted that on this ground alone, the entire case may be quashed. This Court finds that although there is an irregularity in the manner in which the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No. IV, Bhagalpur has proceeded in this case, it would not be an illegality that would warrant for quashing the entire case. Subsequent to the order of transfer, the matter went before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur has found that an offence is made out under Sections 498/34 and 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Counsel for the petitioners challenges the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur dated 3.4.2006 by submitting that 3 charges have to be framed in a particular manner provided in the format, where the charges are set out and the accused is given an opportunity to reply to the specific charges leveled against them. It is submitted that till the year 2008, this procedure was not followed. I do not find the aforesaid submissions, a ground for quashing of the entire case. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur is immediately directed to frame charges in a proper manner, if not already done. This application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and direction. Counsel for the petitioners is directed to produce a copy of this order before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)