IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.56260 of 2007 1. Bhup Narain Singh son of Ram Sobhit Singh 2. Rakesh Kumar Singh @ Ganga Sagar Singh s/o Bhup Narain Singh 3. Ajay Singh s/o Harendra Singh. 4. Indrajeet Singh @ Indrajeet @ Panjabi s/o Harendra Singh All r/o vill. Fatehpur Ram P.S. Mahua, Dist. Vaishali. 5. Mithilesh Singh s/o Jugeshwar Singh 6. Akhilesh Kumar singh S/o Jugeshwar Singh Both r/o vill. Bishunpur, P.S. Mahua, Dist. Vaishali. ---Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Arjun Prasad Singh. Son of late Daroga Singh R/o vill. Fatehpur Ram P.S. Mahua, Dist. Vaishali. ---Opp.Parties. ----------- 03 13.07.2010 Heard learned counsels for the petitioners, opposite party no.2 and State. Petitioners seek to challenge the order dated 16.09.2005 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali (Hajipur) in trial no. 1534 of 2005 arising out of case no. C1-850 of 2003, whereby on a perusal of the materials brought on record in enquiry held under Section 202 of the Cr. P.C. it has been found that there is a prima facie case to be tried. Accordingly cognizance under Section 365 of the Penal Code has been taken and summons has been directed to be issued. Learned counsel for the petitioners while assailing the impugned order states that police on concluding investigation of the case have found that there is no material to substantiate the allegation. Accordingly petitioners herein were not sent up for trial by the police. Referring to annexure-3, it is submitted that the victim boy has candidly stated before the Court that he had 2 married out of his free will with the daughter of Upendra Singh. Looking to the complaint as well as the F.I.R., it is evident that the case of the prosecution is that victim boy was a minor aged about 14 to 15 years. The submission of the petitioners does not impress the Court. Considering the scope of the jurisdiction exercised by learned Magistrate and the fact that in course of inquiry under Section 202 Cr. P.C. materials have surfaced implicating the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order impugned. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)