IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.8240 of 2008 1. HARI MOHAN CHAUDHARY @ MOHAN CHAUDHARY SON OF SRI SATYA NARAYAN CHAUDHARY, R/O- VILLAGE HARARI, P.S.- ANDHRATHADHI, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI 2. BHUBNESHWAR YADAV @ BHUNESHWAR YADAV, SON OF SRI SHIV GULAM YADAV, R/O- VILLAGE MAHINWAR NAVTOLI, P.S.- PHULPARAS DISTRICT- MADHUBANI. 3. YOGENDRA SINGH, SON OF SRI RAMDHARI SINGH, R/O- VILLAGE HARARI, P.S.- ANDHRATHADHI, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI. 4. VISHUNDEO CHAUDHARY, @ BISHUNDEO CHAUDHARY, S/O- LATE RUPAN CHAUDHARY, R/O- VILLAGE HARARI, P.S.- ANDHRATHADHI, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. RAM KUMAR PASWAN, S/O- SRI BUCHCHI PASWAN, R/O- VILLAGE HARARI, P.S.- ANDHRATHADHI, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI. ----------- 3 05.10.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and the State. Petitioners are aggrieved by order dated 7.12.2007, whereby based on charge-sheet, cognizance under Sections 321, 323, 384, ,504/34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3(X) of S.C./S.T. Act has been taken as the learned Magistrate on perusal of the police papers came to the conclusion that there is/are a prima facie case made out against the petitioners. While assailing the order impugned, learned counsel for the petitioners made diverse submissions. It is contended that the present prosecution is maliciously drawn. The informant was found having two dates of birth. There was allegation against him regarding his functioning as Shiksha Mitra. The Gram Sabha by a resolution had removed him from the post of Shiksha Mitra whereafter the present case has been lodged. It is the contention 2 of the petitioners that because of these facts appearing from record, the present case has been lodged. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party, on the contrary, submits that the allegations made in the F.I.R. were supported in course of investigation by several witnesses. The investigating agency found the accusations prima facie true and accordingly, charge-sheet was submitted leading to the impugned order. I have considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties. In the order impugned, learned court below has found that on perusal of different paragraphs of the case diary, it deciphers that there is a prima facie case against the petitioners. Considering the confines of jurisdiction invoked by learned Magistrate, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order impugned. Petitioners shall have adequate opportunity to raise the aforesaid grievance at the appropriate stage of the proceeding and, if raised, the same shall be considered and disposed of in accordance with law. The application is disposed of. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )