IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.28 of 2010 1. Ajit Kumar, son of Pratap Narayan Mishra, 2.Pratap Narayan Mishra, son of Late Vishnu Datt Mishra, 3.Shanti Devi @ Saraswati Devi, wife of Pratap Narayan Mishra, all of Mohalla Dakhin Darwaza, Sisauria Chaura, PS Civil Lines, Dist. Gaya – petitioners. vs. 1. The State of Bihar, 2. Neha Devi, wife of Ajit Kumar and daughter of Ramdeo Pathak, resident of Upardih, PS Civil Lines, District Gaya – opp. Parties. … 2 20.4.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. This application has been filed for quashing the order, dated 4.12.2008 passed by the Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in Complaint Case No. 757/2008/Tr. No. 1645/2008 by which cognizance for the offences under sections498A, 323, 379 and 504 of the Penal Code and sections 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act has been taken. The petitioners are the husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the wife, opposite party no.2 has left petitioner no. 1 after one year of the marriage. He filed a matrimonial case for restitution of conjugal rights on 3.1.2006 and after notices were served, the present complaint under section 498A of the Penal Code and sections ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act has been filed against the petitioners. The specific stand on behalf of the petitioners is that the husband, petitioner no.1 is willing to live with his wife as she has herself deserted him. On the other hand, it has been alleged on behalf of opposite party-complainant that there was a demand of 2 dowry and because of non-fulfilment of the said demand the complainant was tortured. As far as the order taking cognizance is concerned, I find no illegality in it. This application is dismissed. The petitioners may, however, raise whatever points they wish and even enter into a compromise before the trial commences. haque/ (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)