IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.35988 of 2008 1. MAHENDRA PRASAD Son of late Bihari Prasad, Panchayat Sevak, Gram Chaurawan and Onama. 2. Kaushal Kumar son of Mahendra Prasad Both R/o Mohalla Girhindha, P.S. and District Sheikhpura. . . . . . Petitioners. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 5/ 19.05.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 26.06.2008 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sheikhpura, whereby cognizance has been taken under Sections 420, 376 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code in Barbigha P.S. case no. 33 of 2007 dated 12.03.2007. Learned counsel submits that allegation of committing rape is false. He further submits that petitioner no.1 at the relevant time was the Panchayat Sewak and at the verge of retirement. By this time, he is over 62 years. Learned counsel submits that the police after investigation submitted final form in their favour and even learned Magistrate accepted the final form. However, the informant went in revision being Cr. Revision no.149 of 2007. The revisional court by order dated 21.08.2007, set the aside the impugned order dated 02.07.2007, passed by Magistrate accepting the final form and court directed the Magistrate to pass fresh order after discussing the material in the case diary. Thereafter the learned Magistrate by the impugned order dated 26.06.2008 has taken cognizance under Sections 420, 376 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners. The learned Magistrate, in his order dated 26.06.2008 observed that informant in - 2 - her subsequent statement has reiterated her earlier version of commission of rape. In view of the aforesaid finding of the learned Magistrate, I am not inclined to interfere in the impugned order, as such this application is dismissed. However, it will be open to the petitioner to take all these points at the time of framing of charge. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)