IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.43650 of 2006 RAJU YADAV @ HIND KESHARI AYDAV Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Iqbal Asif Naizi, Adv. 4. 12.05.2008. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the order dated 21.7.2005 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga in Sadar P. S. Case No. 101 of 2004 thereby cognizance under Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against this petitioner. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the opposite party no. 2. It appears that the aforesaid police case was registered on the basis of fardbeyan lodged by opposite party no. 2 against four persons including this petitioner who is alleged to be the husband under Sections 498(A)/341/32 I.P.C. However, police after investigation submitted charge-sheet only against this petitioner and final form against other accused persons. Accordingly, court below has taken cognizance against this petitioner under Section 498(A) of the I.P.C. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the entire case is false and baseless. Opposite party no. 2 is not legally wedded wife of the petitioner. Opposite party no. 2 had earlier married with Lileshwar Singh against whom also she had filed a case under Sections 498A/494 I.P.C. bearing Lal Ganj P. S. Case No. 253 of 1999. That case is still pending for trial. Thereafter, - 2 - this case has been filed with false and baseless allegations. In course of investigation also D. S. P. who supervised the case found the above fact as true. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the entire case is improbable and false. The question of demand of dowry etc. has not arisen as opposite party no. 2 is not legally wedded wife. She had already married earlier with one Lileshwar Singh before the alleged date of marriage with the petitioner. This case has been filed only in order to extort money from the petitioner. Taking cognizance on the basis of such allegations is out and out misuse of the process of the Court. Considered the submission of learned counsel for both the parties and perused the FIR of both the cases and also the provision note of D. S. P. Thus, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is quite apparent that this case has been filed with baseless and improbable allegations. It has been filed in order to extort money. Taking cognizance on the basis of such allegations is out and out misuse of the process of the Court. Accordingly, this application is allowed. Impugned order of cognizance dated 21.7.2005 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate; Darbhanga in Sadar P. S. Case No. 101 of 2004 is, hereby, quashed. kanchan (Ghanshyam Prasad, J.)