IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.30947 of 2007 ARBIND KUMAR @ ARBIND KUMAR MAHTO & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 4. 28.7.2008. Both the parties along with their respective lawyer are present. In spite of case lodged by Opposite party no. 2 Smt. Anju Kumari, she is ready to live along with her husband/petitioner no. 1. However, petitioner no. 1 Arbing Kumar @ Arbind Kumar Mahto is not willing to keep her wife. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that complaint case bearing no. 109 of 2004 was filed much after filing of the divorce suit by petitioner no.1. Considered the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the complaint petition. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the allegation mentioned in the complaint petition, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned order of cognizance dated 4.9.2005/5.9.2005 passed by SDJM, Samastipur in C. R. No. 1091 of 2004, T. R. No. 1709 of 2006. Accordingly, this application is rejected. However, petitioners are at liberty to raise all the points at the time of framing of the charge. kanchan (Ghanshyam Prasad, J.)