IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.9089 of 2009 1. Basudhar Yadav, S/o Late Dhari Yadav. 2. Ramjee Yadav, S/o Basudhar Yadav. Both are resident of Raghunathpur, P.S. Brahampur, District- Buxar. ………………………….Petitioners. Versus The State of Bihar …………………….Opposite Party. For the petitioners :- Mr. Ramakant Yadav, Advocate. Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate. For the State :- Mr. Damodar Pd. Tiwary, A.P.P. ----------- 3. 05. 01. 2011. Heard. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 25. 08. 2008 passed by Sri K. M. Tiwary, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Buxar, in G.R. Case No. 1652 of 2006/Trial No. 600 of 2008, arising out of Brahampur P.S. Case No. 175 of 2006, by which cognizance has been taken against the petitioners for offence under Section 364 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Fard Beyan is against unknown and there was no mentioned the names of the accused persons. However, names of the petitioners find place in the F.I.R. in the column of the accused. Though, Final Form has been submitted and Police found that the case is false for offence under Section 364 of the I.P.C. The I.O. of this case clearly stated due to lack of order of superior 2 authority, the report under Sections 182 and 211 of I.P.C. was not initiated against the informant. However, on the Final Form, cognizance was taken observing that in the case diary prima facie the case is make out. It is further submitted that, though, petitioners names find place in subsequent statement of informant as well as statement of witnesses, but the witnesses has named the petitioner due to enmity and further due to inimical term. It has also come in the case diary that there is a land dispute between the petitioners and informant. However, at this stage of taking cognizance the enmity or the defence that witnesses are inimical are not very relevant as this defence can be taken at the stage of trial and can be tested at trial and not the outset. Hence, I do not find any merit to interfere with the impugned order at this stage. However, petitioners may raise issue at the time of framing of the charge. Hence, with the observations/directions this criminal miscellaneous petition is hereby dismissed. m.p. ( Gopal Prasad, J.)