IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.5297 of 2007 1. LAGIYA DEVI W/o Mukhdeo Rai 2. Phuljharia Devi W/o Ravindra Rai 3. Urmila Devi W/o Ramayan Rai 4. Madhuri Devi W/o Surendra Rai All are resident of village- Barbakpur,P.S.-Garkha,P.O.-Pirauna,Dist.- Saran. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Laxminiya Devi W/o Parekhan Rai, Resident of village- Barbakpur,P.S.-Garkha,P.O.- Pirauna,District-Saran. ----------- 08/ 31-03-2009 Heard learned counsel for the parties. This application has been filed for quashing of order dated 20.9.2006, by which the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge(F.T.C.II), Saran at Chapra after setting aside order dated 6.10.2005 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Chapra in Complaint Case No.1989/2002, has allowed Criminal Revision No.270 of 2005. In brief, a complaint case filed by opposite party no.2 arraying petitioners also accused, but no cognizance was taken against them, trial began and after examination of four witnesses a petition was filed under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to summon these petitioners, which was rejected. A revision was preferred against the order, which was allowed. Sustainability of that order has been questioned to quash the same but I find no finality in the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra. No doubt, order of the lower court dated 06.10.2005 has been set aside but matter has been remanded back to the trial court to hear the matter afresh and pass appropriate order in 2 accordance with law. If in compliance of the order again petitioners have been summoned, that order has not been challenged, nor there is any document to corroborate the same. However, if passing of summoning order is accepted, then also petitioner will have an opportunity to raise all the points, which have been taken here, at the stage of charge. Finding no finality in the order impugned, this petition is dismissed with the observation aforesaid. AH/ ( Mandhata Singh, J. )