IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.5297 of 2009 1. DHURANDHAR SINGH @ DHURANDHAR PRASAD SINGH, S/o Late Ram Ayodhya Singh. 2. Padma Singh, W/o Dhurandhar Singh. Both permanently residing at Village-Longboi Tea Estate, Rajgarh, Police Station-Thingkhong, District- Dibrugarh (Assam) Native Village-Sareyan Basant, Police Station-Taraiya, District-Saran. 3. Shyam Sunder Singh, S/o Late Ram Ayodhya Singh, R/o Village-Sareyan Basant, Police Station-Taraiya, District-Saran. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. Mohan Singh, S/o late Wakil Singh, R/o Village-Khairwar, Police Station-Revilganj, District-Saran. ----------- 3. 18.08.2010 The petitioners seek quashing of the entire proceeding including the order dated 03.05.2008 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran in connection with Taraiya P.S. Case No. 110 of 2005 (arising out of Complaint Case No. 2294 of 2005, U.T. 29 of 2008) by which he has taken cognizance under Section 304B IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The facts of the case is that on 19.09.2005 the daughter-in-law of petitioner No. 1 was found hanging in her house in Assam upon which a report was made by the husband of the deceased. The matter was investigated and the post mortem examination revealed that death in fact had been 2 caused by hanging so a final report was submitted in the matter on 17.11.2005 and the same was accepted by the Judicial Magistrate, Dibrugarh, Assam on 30.11.2005. In the meanwhile, the present complaint was filed stating therein that the deceased had been murdered by her in-laws for ends of dowry on 23.09.2005 in that case also final report was submitted in the matter but the Magistrate differing with the same has taken cognizance. The submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that the Courts at Saran did not have territorial jurisdiction but I find the fact mentioned in the complaint that the deceased had been tortured by her in-laws even in her Sasural which presumably was situated in Chapra since the addresses of accused Nos. 1 to 6 is mentioned as such. The further submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that two different investigating agencies one at Saran and other in Assam had investigated the matter and since the allegation was baseless final reports were submitted by them and therefore the present case is nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court. 3 The counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 is not in a position to dispute the factual aspects of the case. In view of such, this application is allowed since the matter was investigated twice by two investigating agencies and no cogent material was found against the petitioners, the entire proceeding of order dated 03.05.2008 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran in connection with Taraiya P.S. Case No. 110 of 2005 (arising out of Complaint Case No. 2294 of 2005, U.T. 29 of 2008) is hereby quashed. Vikash/- ( Anjana Prakash, J.)