IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.6378 of 1999 4 19.4.2010 1. Md. Dulare Son of Late Md. Ismil Mian 2. Most. Sakilu Khatoon, W/o Late Ismil Mian 3. Chunnu Khatoon, W/o Md. Israil 4. Kammo Khatoon, W/o Late Mazarul 5. Titiya Khatoon, W/o Md. Nazir 6. Sabana Khatoon, W/o Md. Dulare All resident of vill. Chanderdipa, P.S. Jalley, Distt. Darbhanga ........ Petitioners VERSUS 1. The State of Bihar 2. Shehana Khatoon, W/o Md. Dulare, resident of village Chanardipa, P.S. Jalley, Distt. Darbhanga, at present daughter of Late Md. Hashim, village Pokharira, P.S. Nanpur, Disttt. Sitamarhi ....... Opp. Parties ------- For the Petitioners : Mr Jagdish Prasad No.1, Advocate For the State : Mr Damodar Pd. Tiwary, APP -------- Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. This application was filed on behalf of six petitioners for quashing of order dated 7.1.1998 passed by Judicial Magistrate 1st class, Sitamarhi whereby cognizance was taken of offences under Section 498A and 323 of the IPC in Complaint Case No.329/98 leading to Trial no.592/99. After considering the facts at the stage of admission, the application was dismissed in respect of 2 petitioner no.1, Md. Dulare and petitioner no.2, Most Sakilu Khatoon, who are said to be husband and mother- in-law respectively of the complainant. In respect of petitioners no.3 to 6, the application has remained pending and requires consideration at the stage of hearing. It has been submitted on behalf of the aforesaid petitioners no.3 to 6 that a careful perusal of the entire complaint petition discloses allegations of overt act or threat etc. only against petitioners no.1 and 2, the husband and the mother-in-law and nothing has been alleged against petitioners no.3 to 6 which may constitute offence under section 498 or 323 of the IPC or any other offence. On that basis, it has been submitted that warrant of arrest was wrongly ordered to be issued against these petitioners by the impugned order. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that even if the aforesaid submissions be correct, the petitioners no.3 to 6 can pray for discharge on that basis before the learned Magistrate. On going through the complaint petition which has been annexed as Annexure-1, the submissions 3 advanced on behalf of the petitioners no.3 to 6 is found to have merit. Only in respect of petitioner no.6, Sabana Khatoon, there is an averment that she has been subsequently married by the husband of the complainant and she allegedly insisted that the complainant should not live in her room. It has rightly been submitted that contents in the complaint petition in respect of petitioners no.3 to 6 do not disclose any criminal offence. In fact, there is virtually absence of any allegations against these petitioners. Considering all the facts and circumstances, it is found that it is in the interest of justice that the criminal case against petitioners no.3 to 6 should not proceed any further as it would be an abuse of process of court. Accordingly, application of petitioners no.3 to 6 is allowed. The criminal proceeding in the complaint case in question in respect of these petitioners is hereby quashed. (Shiva Kirti Singh,J.) sk