IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.29337 of 2009 Ram Patia Devi, wife of Ramprit Uraon 2. Ram Prit Uraon, S/o late Ramdas Uraon 3. Shyam Lal Uraon, S/o late Ramdas Uraon 4. Rajendra Uraon, S/o Sahai Uraon 5. Ram Avtar Uraon, S/o Ram Belas Uraon, All residents of Mohalla-Gullu, Police Station-Adhaura, District- Kaimur …….. Petitioners. Versus 1.The State Of Bihar 2. Rita Kumari, Daughter of Rajendra Uraon, Resident of Mohalla- Gullu, Police Station- -Adhaura, District- Kaimur … O. Ps. ---------------------------------- 2 12-10-2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state. Petitioners while invoking the extraordinary power of this court, have prayed for quashing the order dated 18-07- 2009 passed by Shri V. K. Gupta, Judicial Magistrate-Ist Class, Bhabua (Kaimur) in Complaint Case No. 397 of 2009 whereby and whereunder, the learned Magistrate having found sufficient materials against the petitioners and others for the offences under Sections-366A and 376 of the Indian Penal Code ordered to issue summons to procure their attendance for facing trial. It is gathered from the record that the complainant (opposite party No. 2) filed complaint case bearing Complaint Case No. 397 of 2009 against the petitioners and one, Kamla Uraon in respect of her kidnapping and rape. The aforesaid complaint case was inquired under Section-202 of the Cr.P.C. 2 and having found sufficient materials, the learned Magistrate has passed the impugned order which is under challenge before this court. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the alleged occurrence took place on 15-08-2008 whereas the complaint case was filed on 09-04-2009 i.e. after much delay and as a matter of fact, the complainant had affairs with accused, Kamla Uraon and she eloped with the aforesaid accused Kamla Uraon by her own sweet will but subsequently, she filed the aforesaid complaint case implicating the petitioners also. In my view, the aforesaid contention of the petitioners would be seen at the time of framing of the charge and it is not a proper stage to consider the above said pleas. Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed at the stage of admission itself. However, petitioners may raise all the above-said pleas before the trial court at the time of framing of the charge and if the aforesaid pleas are raised on behalf of the petitioners at the time of framing of the charge, the learned trial court shall pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order. AKV/- ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J.)