CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26781 OF 2000 In the matter of an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ------------- SANYUKTA DEVI @ KAJAL, Sanyukta Devi @ Kajal W/O Sri Manish Choubdey, resident of Village+ P.O. & P.S. Kateya, District-Gopalganj ----------------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Suresh Choubey, Son of Lakshmi Kant Choubey, resident of Village, P.O. and P.S. Kateya, District-Saran --- Opp.Parties. -------------- For the petitioner: Sri Vishwajeet Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the State : Sri Ajay Mishra, A.P.P. ----------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR Rakesh Kumar, J. The petitioner, who claims to be victim in Kateya P.S. Case No. 9 of 2000, had initially filed the present petition for quashing of the First Information Report as well as entire criminal proceeding in Kateya P.S. Case No.9 of 2000. Subsequently, a supplementary affidavit was filed on behalf of the petitioner on 17.10.2001 with a prayer to quash the order of cognizance dated 11.5.2001. The cognizance order was passed for offence under Sections 363& 366 A of the Indian penal Code. The petition was earlier admitted on 28.11.2001 and it was directed that further proceeding in the court below shall remain stayed during the pendency of this application. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of this petition, a petition was filed on behalf of one Manish Choubey , in which a prayer was made to allow Manish Choubey to be added as petitioner no.2. Despite the fact that said petition was filed on 2 27.11.2001, no order was passed by this Court and the present petition was admitted on 28.11.2001. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that since the petition was filed and stay order was also passed, it can be presumed that the petition filed on behalf of Manish Choubey was allowed by this Court. 3. Petitioner Sanyukta Devi @ Kajal was not accused in Kateya P.S. Case No.9 of 2000, which was registered on the basis of fardbeyan of one Suresh Choubey. It was claimed that she was victim lady. Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner was not an accused in the said case, the Court is of the opinion that she is not entitled to maintain the present petition. So far as submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petition filed by the husband of the petitioner will be deemed to be allowed in view of admission of the present petition and ground of stay is concerned, this Court is of the view that such submission is fit to be rejected outrightly. 4. Accordingly, the Court is of the view that it is not a fit case for exercising inherent jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner and the petition stands rejected. It goes without saying that the concerned aggrieved person will be at liberty to question the order of cognizance. Patna High Court, Patna Dated : the 9th August,2010 Nawal Kishore Singh/ N.A.F.R. ( Rakesh Kumar, J )