IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.9023 of 2010 Guddu Kumar, Son of Rajendra Yadav, Resident of Mohalla Nayatola, Kajipur, Police Station Kadamkuan, District Patna. ---------- Petitioner Versus 1. State of Bihar. 2. Pramod Yadav, Son of Daso Yadav, Resident of Mohalla Nayatola, Kazipur, Police Station Kadamkuan, District Patna. ------- Opposite Parties ----------- 2 16.04.2010 Heard Mrs. Sony Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. By the impugned order, the court below has taken cognizance under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code and issued process against the petitioner. Mrs. Shrivastava would submit that here was a case wherein the petitioner and the deceased, both of whom having love affairs, had found it difficult to live in this cruel world and therefore, both of them had consumed sulphas (poison) for ending their lives but as the luck favoured the petitioner, he was saved whereas the girl, deceased, died. She would further submit that from inquest report and other identical circumstances, it was absolutely clear that the girl had committed suicide on her own 2 volition and there was nothing to show that at least the petitioner was instrumental in her committing suicide. She would also insist that the learned Magistrate was required to at least record reasons, even briefly, when he had not taken cognizance for the offence under Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code under which the police had submitted charge-sheet. In the opinion of this Court, all these aspects can be gone into at the stage of framing of charge because the case diary, by way of notes of investigation of police along with document would be available before the court and the petitioner in terms of Section 227 of the Cr.P.C. will have also an effective opportunity to seek discharge. At the stage of taking cognizance, the court is infact only required to look into the existence of prima- facie material and I believe when the police submitted the charge-sheet under Section 309, the approach of the court below in taking cognizance by perusing the Case Diary and finding materials for Section 309 cannot be faulted with. 3 That being so, this application is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to raise all these questions at the time of framing of charge. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)