IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11554 of 2007 1. INDRA KUMAR JHA 2. KUMAR JHA 3. RAM SHANKAR JHA 4. KHIDDI CHAUDHARY @ INDRA KANT CHAUDHARY 5. SHARDA NAND CHAUDHARY 6. BIBHA DEVI 7. ABHA DEVI 8. BANARSI DEVI 9. ANMOL DEVI …PETITIONERS Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. RAMDAI DEVI …OPPOSITE PARTIES For the petitioners: Mr. Kaushal Kumar Jha-4 For the complainant: Mr.Ajay Kumar ----------- 9. 23.07.2010 Heard counsel for the parties. Petitioners are aggrieved by order taking cognizance dated 9.02.2007, passed by learned Magistrate in C.R.No.318/06. Learned Magistrate on the basis of materials available on record which includes the complaint, solemn affirmation of the complainant and two witnesses examined on behalf of the complainant, came to the conclusion that there is prima facie material available on record justifying taking cognizance under sections 147,323,504,380 & 379 IPC and sections 3, 4 & 5 of the Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act,1999. While assailing the validity of the order, it is stated that owing to the land disputes between the family of the petitioners and the complainant, the present case has been lodged. - 2 - Learned counsel further submits that only a month prior to the present occurrence, the complainant had lodged an FIR ((Annexure-2) against some of the petitioners herein with concocted allegations. He further submits that the said matter is still under investigation. It is thus the contention that this criminal proceeding is perpetuated with malice. At the stage of taking cognizance, learned Magistrate has only to satisfy himself as to whether a prima facie case is made out or not from the materials on record. In that view of the matter, in my view, he has not committed any illegality. Petitioners shall have opportunity to raise all these issues at the time of framing of charge which shall be considered and disposed of by learned trial court in accordance with law. The application is dismissed. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )