IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR.MISC. NO.44617 OF 2008 1. NARAYAN MAHTO 2. SATTO MAHTO BOTH ARE SONS OF RAJO MAHTO @ RAJO PURVE, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BITHAN BAZAR, POLICE STATION BITHAN, DISTRICT SAMASTIPUR VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. MD. ALLAUDDIN, SON OF LATE NOOR MOHAMMAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BITHAN BAZAR, POLICE STATION BITHAN, DISTRICT SAMATIPUR ********** 2 02/08/2011 Heard Counsel for the petitioners and the A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State. This application has been filed challenging the order dated 25.08.2008 passed in Bithan Police Station Case No. 13 of 2007 by which the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rosera, Samastipur has taken cognizance for the offences alleged to have been committed under Sections 376, 302 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were initially named in the First Information Report on the basis of suspicion as there was a land dispute between the informant’s family and the petitioners and his family. Subsequently, one Kari was arrested in this case and it is said that he confessed his guilt. The case was investigated and finally, the Investigating Officer has submitted final form not sending 2 up these petitioners to face trial. On perusal of the order impugned, it appears that the Court below has taken cognizance on the basis of the materials in the case diary. It is specifically stated on behalf of the petitioners that in fact, apart from the suspicion, there is no merit in the case diary to substantiate the fact that the petitioner was responsible either for rape or subsequent murder of the victim girl. These aspects of the matter ought to be examined by the Court below at the stage of framing of the charges, if not already done. This application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)