IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.13316 of 2008 1. Suresh Chaudhary @ Surendra Chaudhary , Son of Late Mewalal Chaudhary, Permanent resident of village- Mushahari, P.S. Chandi, District Nalanda, presently working as Acount Assistant in Rajgir Electric Sub-Division, Rajgir, in the district of Nalanda. 2. Sunita Devi, wife of Suresh Chaudhary @ Surendra Chaudhary, permanent resident of village- Mushahari, P.S. Chandi, District- Nalanda. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. Ram Naresh Chaudhary, Son of Late Sita Ram Chaudhary, resident of Mohalla Bikhachuck, Road No.21, P.S. Gardanibagh, Town & District Patna. ----------- 3 20.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. This application has been filed for quashing the order of cognizance dated 26.02.2007 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hilsa, Nalanda in Chandi P.S. Case No. 226 of 2006 by which he has taken cognizance under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 304B of the Indian Penal Code after differing with the final form. The petitioner No.1 is the brother-in-law (Bhaisur) of the victim lady whereas petitioner no.2 Sunita Devi is the wife of petitioner no.1. The specific case of the petitioner is that they are not residing at Masourhi with Sheo Shankar Chaudhary the husband of the victim girl. In the first information report, it is mentioned that there was a demand by Sheo Shankar Chaudhary for T.V. and some money. It is also alleged that Sheo Shankar Chaudhary had a love affair with some other woman and in that context he used to beat his wife. There is a vague allegation that all the family members tortured the victim girl. In the circumstances mentioned aforesaid, it would appear that the main grievance of the informant is against the 2 husband Sheo Shankar Chaudhary and not against her in-laws who were not responsible for demand of dowry as well as for torture of the victim girl. It has been specifically submitted on behalf of the petitioner, that petitioner no.1 is an Account Assistant of the Electric Supply Division. In course of his work, he had been posted at different places. On the date of occurrence he was posted at Rajgir, whereas at present he has settled at Ranchi. Learned counsel for the petitioner informs this Court that the case is ready for framing of charges. Accordingly, if the petitioners file discharge application, the Court will take into consideration the fact that the petitioners have no concern with the activities of Sheo Shankar Chaudhary nor is there any direct allegation against them, that they had demanded dowry. The allegation is against the husband for torturing his wife on account of a love affair. It is submitted that statement has been made to harass the entire family as there is no material in the first information report to support the story of torture as far as these petitioners are concerned. This application is disposed off with liberty to the petitioners to raise these issues before the Court below at the stage of framing of charge. Md. Ibrarul ( Sheema Ali Khan,J.)