IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.16295 of 2006 BIKAU YADAV & ANR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 5 31.7.2008 Heard Sri Kanhaiya Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Jharkhandi Upadhaya, the learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel for O.P. No. 2. The two petitioners who figure as F.I.R. named accused in Sessions Trial No. 144 of 2005, arising out of Madhwapur P.S. Case No. 24 of 1997, have prayed for the quashing of the order dated 13.3.2006 passed therein whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge I, Madhubani, has rejected their petition under section 227 Cr.P.C. for their discharge. The allegation against the petitioners was that they caused the dowry death of Kiran Devi by administration of poison for non fulfillment of dowry demands. The case diary discloses that the doctor has not given any opinion as to the cause of death and the viscera report received from the Forensic Laboratory, Patna did not disclose the presence of any poison in the viscera. That apart paragraph 35 of the case diary discloses that although Kiran Devi died at about 10 P.M. on the night of 5.4.1997 yet her cremation did not take place as they were waiting for the arrival of Kiran Devi’s parents to whom message of her death had been sent through Ram Prit Rai. The impugned order does not disclose what prevailed with the learned Additional Judge to reject the petition. He has merely - 2 - stated that there was sufficient materials in the record to frame charges without referring to those materials or even referring to the paragraphs of the case diary. The order impugned appears to be perfunctory. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Court below to record a proper and convincing order. Due regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, the application is allowed and the matter is remanded back to the Court below for fresh consideration in accordance with law. Spd/- (Abhijit Sinha, J.)