IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.14682 of 2010 1. TARA DEVI W/O SRI JITAN THAKUR 2. ARUNE KUMAR THAKUR @ BABLU THAKUR S/O SHRI JITAN THAKUR BOTH R/O VILLAGE- GANGAULI, P.S.- SIMRI, DISTRICT- BUXAR. ………………… Petitioners Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR …………. Opposite Party ----------- 2. 16.12.2010 Heard the parties. The petitioners have sought quashing of the order dated 27.3.2010 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court-II, Buxar in S.T. No. 282 of 2005, by which the court below has allowed amendment of charge and addition of Section 304-B I.P.C. in the charge. It has been submitted that the said application was filed after much delay by the prosecution and thereafter it should not have been allowed. However, on going through the petition filed on behalf of the prosecution it has been elaborately stated that there were some witnesses who supported the fact that demands of dowry had been made by in- laws and the deceased had been done to death on account of non-fulfillment of the same. In view such, in the interest of the charge should be allowed to be amended by the court below. But at the same time, I must comment that the trial should have been more vigilant and when there was evidence forthcoming to amend the charge and add Section 304-B it should have done so at that stage instead of waiting for the prosecution to file a petition for amendment of charge at a belated stage. In view of such, the application is dismissed. The prosecution i.e. the informant is required to pay a sum of Rs.500/- per witness to the accused person. Fahad. ( Anjana Prakash, J. )