IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.48149 of 2008 1. Barun Jha @ Barun Kumar Jha, son of Late Shubh Kant Jha. 2. Bhairab Jha, son of Late Shiv Kant Jha. Both resident of Village-Kaithinia Tole Laxmipur, P.S. R.S. Shivir Jhanjharpur (Madhepur), District- Madhubani. ………………………………………………Petitioners. Versus 1. State Of Bihar. 2. Jeebachch Paswan, son of Late Gokhal Paswan, resident of Village-Kaithiniya, Tola-Balbhadrapur, P.S. Madhepur (R.S. Shivir), Jhanjharpur, District- Madhubani. ………………………………………Opposite Parties. ---------------------------------- For the Petitioners : M/s. Binodanand Mishra, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A.P.P. ----------------------------------- 2. 18.8.2011. Heard. This application has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of the petitioners for quashing the order dated 17.3.2008 passed in Tr. No.2283 of 2008/Complaint Case No.829 of 2007, by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jhanjharpur, summoning the accused persons named in the complaint petition including the petitioners finding the prima facie case under Sections 323, 341, 506, 120B and 386 of the 2 Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the learned Magistrate while disbelieve the allegation under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code besides Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(X) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Corruption) Act on perusal of complaint petition and statements of witnesses but illegally summoned the accused named in complaint petition including petitioners illegally finding prima facie case under Sections 323, 341, 504/120-B and 386 I.P.C. From perusal of the order dated 17.3.2008, it appears that the learned Magistrate on going through the complaint petition, S.A. of complainant and statements of the witnesses has come to the conclusion that the case under Sections 323, 341, 506, 120-B and 386 of the Indian Penal Code is made out against the accused named in the complaint petition including the petitioners. There is nothing in the order to show that there is abuse of the process of law. As a result, this application is dismissed. P.S. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J)