IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.12489 of 2007 DHORHA RAM & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 5 8.9.2008 Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners as also Mr. Mayanand Jha, learned A.P.P. for the State. The learned counsel for O.P. No. 2 who has filed vakalatnama on behalf of O.P. No. 2 but has been conspicuous by his absence during the hearing of the case. Through this application the petitioners have prayed for the quashing of order dated 18.8.2006 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Danapur in Bihta P.S. Case No. 70 of 2005, whereby the prayer of the petitioners for their discharge has been rejected. They have also prayed for the quashing of order dated 19.1.2007 passed by the learned Sessions Judge in Cr. Revision No. 789 of 2006, whereby he has approved the order passed by the learned Magistrate. O.P. No. 2, the complainant and the wife of petitioner no. 2, Dharmendra Kumar, submitted a written report before the police inter alia alleging that notwithstanding cash and gifts given to her at the time of marriage, the petitioners who happen to be the parents – in – law, husband and grandfather – in – law started demanding a sum of Rs. 50,000/- for the husband to run a business and for the non fulfillment thereof she was being tortured and assaulted. At times she was also threatened of having to suffer dire consequences so that the husband could remarry again. - 2 - On behalf of the petitioners it has been submitted that they have committed no offence and it also appears that in the averments in the written report no specific overt act or allegations have been made against any of these petitioners and the allegations as such are omnibus and general in nature. Neither the magisterial order nor the revisional court’s order while rejecting the prayer for discharge has been able to assign reasons as to why they are not being discharged save and except the fact that a prima facie case appears to have been made out. This according to me is not the ambit and scope of either section 227, 235 or 239 Cr.P.C. In the facts and circumstances of the case both the orders of the learned Magistrate and the revisional court are hereby set aside and the case is remitted back to the learned Magistrate to consider the petition for discharge afresh and pass fresh order in accordance with law assigning his reason therefor. Spd/- (Abhijit Sinha, J.)