IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.27805 of 2005 1. RAM CHANDRA SAHU 2. MUKTI SAHU 3. LALIT SAHU 4. RAM SUNDAR SAHU 5. BASUDEO SAHU 6. DEWENDRA SAHU 7. YOGENDRA SAHU, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BARSAM, BHEJA, MADHUBANI. VERSUS 1. STATE OF BIHAR & 2. KHAKHAN SADA, BARSAM, BHEJA, MADHUBANI. ----------- 6 25.01.2010. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioners pray for quashing order dated 3.3.2005, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Jhanjharpur in CR No. 249 of 2004, TR No. 424 of 2005, whereby cognizance of offence under sections 3 (IV),(V),(IX) & (X) of the Harijan Atrocities Act and sections 452, 380,323, 384 & 120B of the Penal Code. Petitioners submit that it would appear from the complaint itself that the occurrence took place within the premises of the complainant and not in the public view, as such, no case under the Harijan Atrocities Act would be made out against petitioners. Furthermore, there is no material against the petitioners in the complaint to prosecute them for offences even under the Penal Code. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the materials on record, I find that no case under the Harijan Atrocities Act is made out against the petitioners as the complainant has himself stated in the complaint that petitioners entered into his house when he was sleeping there, started assaulting him, took away clothes, money and got his thumb impression on blank papers. Cognizance for offences taken against the petitioners under the Harijan Atrocities Act and under sections 452,380,323,384/120B I.P.C. is set aside. However, the case would proceed - 2 - against the petitioners under section 323 I.P.C. The instant petition is thus partially allowed. Shashi. (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J).