IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.54924 of 2007 1. RAMU MEHTA S/O LATE SUWALAL MEHTA 2. RAM RUP MEHTA S/O LATE BHUTKUN MEHTA --- PETITIONERS. Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. SARASWATI DEVI W/O DAMODAR MEHTA -- OPP. PARTIES. For the Petitioner : Mr. Mahendra Pathak, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Ramchandra Singh, APP ----------- 04 07.09.2010 Heard both sides. Petitioners seek to challenge the order taking cognizance dated 03.04.2007 passed on the complaint case bearing no. 477C of 2006 (Saraswati Devi vs. Ram Mehta & ors.). The complaint was lodged against the petitioners herein alleging therein that they entered into the house of the complainant and committed rape on her. This was also witnessed by 10 years old daughter of the complainant. The complainant in course of her S.A. supported the prosecution case. The witnesses adduced on behalf of the complainant also supported the case so far as the intrusion of the accused in the house of the complainant is concerned. Learned trial Court, on the basis of the materials on record, found that a prima facie case under Sections 376 and 511 of the Penal Code is made out. While assailing the impugned order, it is contended that in the year 2005 an F.I.R. was lodged against the own Bhaisur ( elder brother-in-law) of the complainant under Section 376 of the Penal Code which was pending trial. During the pendency of the trial the present case has lodged just to exert undue pressure on the prosecution side. At the stage of taking cognizance these aspects of the matter cannot be considered. Petitioners shall have adequate opportunity to raise/agitate these facts at the relevant stage of the proceeding. This Court does not find any patent illegality in the impugned order meriting interference. The application is dismissed. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)