IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.47324 of 2006 MANOJ BHARTI @ MANOJ KUMAR BHARTI & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 4 18-08-2008 Heard the learned counsels for the petitioners as also the learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for Opp.Party No.2. The petitioners, who happen to be the husband and the relatives of the husband of complainant, Ranju Kumari Bharti @ Anita, through this application has prayed for the quashing of the order dated 15.9.2000 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Birpur in connection with Complaint Case No.325 C of 2000, whereby cognizance has been taken against the petitioners under Sections 498, 379, 494 and other allied Provisions of the Penal Code. The submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that except for the husband the allegations so far the other petitioners are concerned are general and omnibus in nature and no specific overt act has been attributed to or alleged against any of them. Unfortunately, the prayer for quashing of the impugned order dated 15.9.2000 is sought to be made through this application which was filed six years latter on 10.11.2006 and no stay having been granted in the application before this Court , the case has dragged for another two years. The learned counsels at the bar are not in a position to state as to the present status of the case before the court below. 2 Since no stay has been granted by this Court it is presumed that the court below has proceeded with the case. However, if the trial has not proceeded any further for whatsoever reason , the petitioners shall be entitled to raise all these issues at the time of framing of charge and in the event of such issues being raised , the court below on due consideration of the matter will dispose of the same in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observations, this application is disposed of. ( Abhijit Sinha, J) NKS/-