IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.43237 of 2009 1. Raj Kumari Devi, wife of Bindeshwari Paswan. 2. Rati Kant Paswan, Son of Bindeshwari Paswan. 3. Manikant Paswan, Son of Bindeshwari Paswan. All resident of village-Madhuban, P.S.-Jankinagar, District-Purnia. ………….Petitioners. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ………..Opp. Party. Advocate for the petitioners: 1. Sri Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr. Adv. 2. Bijendra Kumar Singh, Adv. For the State: Indu Bala Pandey, A.P.P. ------------- 2/ 11.01.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioners and the State. This application has been filed against the order dated 13.08.2009 by which the court had taken cognizance under Sections 498 (A), 304(B), 328 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that cognizance has been taken without waiting for the results of viscera report. According to the counsel of the petitioners, the viscera report discloses that no poison was found in the chemical analysis. It is submitted that the lady died in hospital, and there is no material to indicate foul play by the petitioners. The onus in a case under section 304 (B) shifts to the accused. The accused have to prima facie establish their innocence as they have to prima facie, show that there was no demand of dowry. At this stage, the court cannot consider all these aspects. These issues including any other issue, should be raised at the time of framing of charge. 2 This application is disposed of with the aforesaid observation. Sanjeet/ (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)