IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.4831 of 2007 HARE RAM PRASAD Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. Ramakant Prasad For the petitioner : Mr.Raghav Prasad For O.P.No.2 :Mr.Ram Kishore Singh For the State : Mr.Ansarul Haque,APP ----------- 9. 26.07.2010 Heard counsel for the parties. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 9.10.2006, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan in connection with Siwan(Muffasil) P.S. Case No.161/2004, whereby cognizance under sections 302, 328,109 & 120B IPC has been taken. While assailing the sustainability of the order, it is contended that there is no legal material on record justifying the order so far as the petitioner is concerned who is relative of the victim, namely, the wife of the deceased. It is submitted that even the mother of the deceased as well as the daughter of the informant has not supported the prosecution case. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as the State, on the other hand submit that there is evidence on record justifying the impugned order. In this regard, they have referred to the materials appearing at paragraphs 34 and 39 of the case diary. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and after going through materials on record, - 2 - this Court is of the view that learned Magistrate has considered the materials available on record and thereby recorded his satisfaction that there is prima facie material(s) against the petitioner as well justifying impugned order. Considering the scope of jurisdiction invoked by learned Magistrate, this Court is satisfied that no patent illegality as such has been committed. Consequently, the application is dismissed. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner shall be agitating all these grievances at the relevant stage of trial. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )