IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.43784 of 2008 MUNESHWARI DEVI Wife of Late Gopal Prasad, resident of Mohalla: Manpur, Durga Asthan, Police Station- Buniyadganj, District- Gaya. . . . . . Petitioner. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 4/ 19.05.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 12.09.2008 passed by Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in Complaint case no. 181 of 2006, Tr. No. 751 of 2008, whereunder the petitioner’s application dated 11.07.2008 for dispensing with her personal attendance under Section 317 of Cr.P.C. for two months and to allow her to go to U.S.A. for reconciliation of the dispute, has been rejected. The petitioner is an accused in a case under Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code, filed by opposite party no.-2, Sita Devi. The son of the petitioner, Dhanraj Kumar, who happens to be the husband of opposite party no.2, is also accused in this case. The son of the petitioner lives in USA. The petitioner has already been granted anticipatory bail. Learned counsel submits that petitioner wants to go to USA to impress upon her son to make reconciliation with opposite party no.-2. The wish of the petitioner seems to be very pious. Learned counsel submits that as the son of the petitioner did not appear, the trial of the petitioner has been separated. He further submits that even two witnesses have been examined before framing of charge. He further submits that petitioner is an old lady aged about 70 years and on account of some misunderstanding, she has also been - 2 - made an accused in this case. He further submits that she is always desirous that her son and her daughter-in-law (opposite party no.-2) may live peacefully and happily. He further submits that for this purpose, she has made an application in the court below for grant of permission to go to U.S.A., so that she may persuade upon her son to come to India at the earliest for reconciliation. Counsel for the State submits that this court may direct for early disposal of the case. After hearing the parties, this court finds that as many as 7-8 family members have been made accused including this petitioner, who is aged about 70 years. The case is of the year, 2006, as such this Court directs that order in respect of framing of charge be definitely passed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order. However, if the complainant does not examine any other witness within a period of four weeks, charges would be framed on the basis of material available on record. In case, the Magistrate frames charge against petitioner, in such circumstances, the trial of the case would finally be disposed of preferably within a period of 10 weeks thereafter. The complainant would be directed to bring her witnesses within the aforesaid time fixed. With the aforesaid direction, this application is disposed of. However, it will be open to the petitioner to renew her prayer for permission to go to aboard at any subsequent stage. Uday/ (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)