CRIMINAL MISCELLENEOUS NO. 17874 OF 2007 ***** ( In the matter of application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ) ****** 1. MANZAR IMAM @ MANZAR ALAM, SON OF LATE ABDUS SATTAR 2. SAHJAD ALAM, SON OF LATE ABDUS SATTAR 3. TAUKIR ALAM, SON OF LATE ABDUS SATTAR 4. ABU NAWAZ @ CHHORIA LAL, SON OF LATE ABDUS SATTAR 5. GANGEE ALAM @ GANGEE, SON OF LATE ABDUS SATTAR 6. BHUTTI KHATOON, DAUGHTER OF LATE ABDUS SATTAR 7. MAZAUDDIN, SON OF JANGI HUSSAIN 8. MUSRAT BEGUM, WIFE OF SAHJAD ALA 9. SAMA PARVEEN, WIFE OF MANZAR ALAM @ IMAM 10. MOST. SALGUN NISHA, WIFE OF LATE JANGI 11. SAMINA KHJATOON, WIFE OF LATE JANGI 12. BIBI AMILA KHATOON, WIFE OF MAZAUDDIN 13. MAHAJABI KHATOON, DAUGHTER OF MAZAUDDIN 14. AINUDDIN, SON OF LATE BAZIRUDDIN 15. SAHIRUN NISHA, WIFE OF AINUDDIN 16. NOORJAHAN BEGUM, WIFE OF MAZEBUL ALL RESIDENT OF LODHABARI, POLICE STATION TERHAGACHH, DISTRICT KISHANGANJ ………………………..…………………………………………….……...PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. AMIRUL, SON OF LATE DOUR ALI, RESIDENT OF LODHABARI, POLICE STATION TERHAGACHH, DISTRICT KISHANGANJ …………………………………………………..……………………OPPOSITE PARTIES ******************** FOR THE PETITIONERS :- MR. RADHA MOHAN SINGH, ADVOCATE FOR THE S T A T E :- MR. JHARKHANDI UPADHYAY, A.P.P. FOR O.P. NO. 2 :- NONE ********** P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. SHEEMA ALI KHAN O R D E R Sheema Ali Khan, J. The First Information Report has been instituted because of a dispute over lands which are 2 appertaining to Khata No. 18, Khesra No. 521/646, measuring 6 acres 41 decimals, which was recorded in the name of Halima Khatoon, who is the mother of petitioners 1 to 4. There are cases pending between the informant and the petitioners, although there is a decision of the Deputy Director, Consolidation regarding the lands in question in the name of the mother of petitioners 1 to 4. It is submitted that the informant is trying to illegally capture the lands and has been instituting false cases against these petitioners. On perusal of the First Information Report, it appears that petitioner no. 1 has been alleged the role of an order giver, whereas several ladies have been made accused in this case, in which it is alleged that they had gathered to assault the informant. It is also alleged that the petitioners took away certain household articles and silver ornaments worth Rs. 50,000/- Learned Counsel for the petitioners referring to the investigation, points out that there is no injury report to allege that the petitioners have come armed with weapons with intention to assault the informant. The fact that they entered the house and committed theft appears to be a false allegation based on a vague statement, as no list has been provided of the articles stolen. At least, a tentative list ought to have been given 3 by the informant while lodging the case. I find that the allegations against petitioner no. 1 and several others is not substantiated during the investigation in the case diary and the Court below has thus without application of mind and without stating any good grounds made them accused in this case. I, therefore, quash the order as far as it concerns the petitioner nos. 1, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15 and 16 on the ground that the allegations are unbelievable and cannot be accepted by any reasonable person. The other petitioners would be at liberty to raise the issues raised before this Court at the stage of framing of the charges. In the result, this application is allowed in part. ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. ) PATNA HIGH COURT DATED, THE 14th FEBRUARY, 2011 N.A.F.R./ANAND