IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.41799 of 2008 1. Ram Jatan Das 2. Ram Lagan Das 3. Mahesh Das 4. Sumitra Devi 5. Satni Devi 6. Pawitri Devi Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Preeti Devi ----------- 3/ 25.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. This application has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding including the order of taking cognizance dated 19.09.2006 passed by the S.D.J.M., Lakhisarai in Complaint Case No. 111-C of 2006 whereby he has taken cognizance under Section 498 A of the I.P.C. and under Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Earlier to this application, seven others accused persons in Complaint Case No. 111C of 2006 approached this Court to quash the proceeding on the ground that for the similar set of allegation, Complaint Case No. 58 of 2006 was filed in the Court of C.J.M., Jamshedpur, so the Court at Lakhisarai was lacking jurisdiction. That is accepted by a different Bench of this Court vide Cr. Misc.No. 51680 of 2006 order dated 30.05.2007. It is specifically said that petitioners of above Criminal Miscellaneous were relation of the complainant, while petitioners of this case are strainger to the family. 2 Taking that view into consideration, this application is allowed and order dated 19.09.2006 passed by the S.D.J.M., Lakhisarai in Complaint Case No. 111-C of 2006 whereby he has taken cognizance under Sections 498A of the I.P.C. and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act against these petitioners is ordered to be quashed. Accordingly, the application is disposed of. shail (Mandhata Singh, J.)