CRIMINAL MISCELLANIOUS No.35397 OF 2005 ******* In the matter of an application under Section 482 Of the Code of Criminal Procedure. ******* 1.RUBI KUMARI 2.REKHA KUMARI --------------------PETITIONERS Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.DURGA DEVI -----------------OPPOSITE PARTY ******* FOR THE PETITIONERS : M/s Ram Prasad Bhagat & S.K. Ranjan FOR THE State : Mr. Damodar Pd. Tiwary, APP ******* P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHILESH CHANDRA Akhilesh Chandra, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. None appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2. 2. This is an application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of order dated 13th January, 2005 passed by Sri R.S. Ram Judicial Magistrate, Banka, in Trial no. 2584 of 2004 2 (Complaint Case no. 1292 of 2004 ) taking cognizance of the offence against the petitioner under Section 418 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The opposite party no.2 being a candidate for the post of Aangan Bari Sewika, as alleged, was initially approved by the Gram Sabha in general meeting but such declaration was deferred. Subsequently, she could know that illegally other candidate Pushpa Kumari, who, on certain grounds is not qualified, has been selected for the post. 4. The rules prescribed for such selection and appointment of Aangan Bari Sewika and Sahayak vide letter no.1129 dated 13th June, 1998 (Annexure-2) indicates that if there is any violation of either of the Rule prescribed, it is the Director, Social Welfare, authorized to nullify the selection of candidate selected in violation of Rules. The candidate, if any, has any grievance, may submit representation before appropriate Authority who shall consider the prayer in accordance with law and materials available. The entire allegation levelled in the complaint petition does not disclose 3 commission of any criminal offence. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances, further proceedings before the court below seems sheer wastage of precious judicial time. Accordingly, the impugned order is quashed. The application stands allowed. (Akhilesh Chandra, J.) Patna High Court, The 15th November, 2010. AAhmad/ (NAFR).