IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.27874 of 2008 Surendra Singh, son of Jagdeo Singh, resident of Village- Surungapur, P.S. Sandesh, District-Bhojpur. …………………………………………………….Petitioner. Versus The State Of Bihar………………………..Opposite Party. ---------------------------------- 3. 1.12.2011. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner has approached this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the order dated 3.1.2008 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur at Ara, in Complaint Case No.1720(C) of 2007/Tr. No.2781 of 2007, summoning the accused, named in the complaint petition, including the petitioner finding prima facie case under Sections 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that from perusal of the protest-cum- complaint petition, it appears that the complainant, Anuradha Devi, has not made her husband as accused and only with a view to partition the land and to harass the in-laws, she has filed the complaint petition making the petitioner as accused, 2 who is her father-in-law. It appears from the impugned order dated 3.1.2008 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur at Ara, in Complaint Case No.1720(C) of 2007 that after filing of the protest-cum-complaint petition by the complainant, Anuradha Devi, on inquiry, the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur at Ara, on perusal of the complainant petition, solemn affirmation of the complainant and the statements of the six witnesses, as examined in course of the inquiry, arrived at the conclusion that prima facie the case under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act is made out against the accused including the petitioner and, accordingly, summoned the accused including the petitioner. I find no illegality in the impugned order dated 3.1.2008 passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur at Ara, in Complaint Case No.1720(C) of 2007/Tr. No.2781 of 2007, amounting to abuse of the process of the court. So far as the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the complainant has made the accused only her in-laws excluding her husband only to put undue pressure on them for partition the land is concerned, at the time of 3 summoning the accused, the Magistrate/court is not required to look into the defence of the accused, rather the Magistrate/court is only required to see as to whether on perusal of the complaint petition, solemn affirmation of the complainant and the statements of the witnesses prima facie the case is made out or not against the accused. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed. P.S. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J)