IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.15356 of 2008 1. SUSHMA DEVI WIFE OF PRABHU NIRANJAN KUMAR GUPTA. 2. PRABHU NIRANJAN KUMAR GUPTA SON OF SRI OM PRAKASH GUPTA. BOTH RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE DIGHI, P.S. HAJIPUR, DISTRICT VAISHALI (HAJIPUR). … … PETITIONERS. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SABITA DEVI WIFE OF SRI PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA GUPTA AND SON OF SRI RAMESHWAR SAH RESIDENT OF ----------- 2. 23.6.2010. No one appears on behalf of the petitioners. Two petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for quashing of the order dated 8.1.2007 passed by S.D.J.M., Chapra in Complaint Case No.2476 of 2005 whereby the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences under Sections 498(A) and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and directed to issue process to secure the attendance of the accused persons including both the petitioners. On perusal of the record, it transpires that petitioner no.1 Sushma Devi was mother-in-law and petitioner no.2 Prabhu Niranjan Kumar Gupta was father-in-law of the complainant. On perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the learned Magistrate, after conducting enquiry, had examined the entire record and assigning a detailed reason had passed the order of cognizance. The learned Magistrate, by the impugned order, has not proceeded against some of the accused persons since there were no sufficient material against them. The order of cognizance 2 is a reasoned order and suffers from no error. Accordingly, I do not find any material to exercise inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in favour of the accused persons and the petition stands rejected. Md.S. ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)