IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR.MISC. NO.33038 OF 2008 1. MADAN YADAV, SON OF LATE TANUK PRASAD YADAV 2. SANJEEV KUMAR, SON OF SURENDRA PRASAD YADAV 3. RAJEEV KUMAR, SON OF SURENDRA PRASAD YADAV ALL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RAMSINGH TOLA, JITAPUR, POLICE STATION MURLIGANJ, DISTRICT MADHEPURA …………………………………………………………………PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. AMARIKA DEVI, WIFE OF LATE BHOLA YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RAMSINGH TOLA JITAPUR, POLICE STATION MURLIGANJ, DISTRICT MADHEPURA …………………………………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES ************ 4 07/12/2009 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the Opposite Parties. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 21.08.2007 by which the Court below has taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 354, 379, 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no. 1 Madan Yadav had purchased a piece of land from the husband of the complainant on 15.02.2002. After the death of the husband Bhola Yadav, the complainant fell in the clutches of some persons and was trying to retrieve the land sold by her husband to this petitioner. It is submitted that for this reason, Amarika Devi has filed this false complaint petition. It is further submitted that Amarika Devi is in the habit of filing false and frivolous cases which would 2 be apparent from Annexure-2, Complaint Case no. 180 of 2008. Learned Counsel further submits that he is being threatened by the complainant for which he has filed informatory petition before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura on 21.07.2006 and 17.08.2007. All these aspects of the matter may or may not be a good defence and can be considered by the Court below at the appropriate stage. For the present, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order on the grounds mentioned aforesaid. This application is accordingly dismissed. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)