IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.105 of 2007 Laxman Prasad, S/o Late Raj Kumar Prasad resident of Gudri Bazar, Bairgania, P.S. Bairgania, District-Sitamarhi (Bihar) …… (Informant)-Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar trhough its Chief Secretary at Patna, Bihar. 2. Amardeep Kumar (in J.C.) S/o Late Ram Ekwal Sah. 3. Ajgabi Kumar S/o Late Ram Ekwal Sah. 4. Phool Kumari Devi @ Raj Kumar Devi W/o Late Ram Ekwal Sah 2 to 4 resident of village Bhakurahar, P.S. Bairgania, District- Sitamarhi. 5. Bom Shankar Jaiswal S/o Late Mahesh Prasad Choudhary, resident of village Ashogi, P.S. Bairgania, District-Sitamarhi. 6. Santosh Kumar Sah, S/o Late Rajendra Sah. 7. Guddu Kumar S/o Ashok Sah, 6 to 7 resident of Gudri Bazar, Bairgania Ward No. 7, P.S. Bairgania, District-Sitamarhi. 8. Arjun Kumar, S/o Ram Chandra Sah, resident of Mai Asthan, Bairgania, P.S. Bairgania, District-Sitamarhi. 9. Shyam Kumar, S/o Sonelal Prasad resident of Ashogi, P.S. Bairgania, District-Sitamarhi (near Bairgania Gurukul). 10. Poonam Devi, W/o Sunjay Kumar resident of village Dostiya, P.S. Pipri, District Sheohar. (residing at Naglor, New Delhi) ….Opposite Parties. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Bindeshwar Sah, Adv. : Mr. Ram Babu Ray, Adv. For O.P. 5 to 10 : Mr. Arun Kumar, Adv. : Mr. Hanslal Kumar, Adv. : Mr. Md. Hussamuddin Azad, Adv. For the State : Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, APP ----------- 05. 27.03.2009 Learned counsel for the parties are present. The instant revision application is directed against the order dated 18.12.2006 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi, in Bairgania P.S. Case No. 88 of 2006, G. R. No. 1164 of 2006, arising out of Trial No. 667 of 2006. - 2 - The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order whereby cognizance has been taken only against opposite parties No. 2, 3 & 4 under Sections 366-A, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and not against opposite parties No. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 & 10 to face trial. Further grievance is that the cognizance ought to have been taken under Sections 376, 364A, 328, 506 and 216 of the Indian Penal Code also. Learned counsel for the private opposite parties submits that some witnesses have already been examined in the trial. In course of trial if the court finds that there is sufficient material for passing order u/s 319 Cr.P.C., it will be always open to pass appropriate order. With the aforesaid direction this application is dismissed. Vikash/- (Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.)