(1.) Five petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for quashing of an order dated 10.12.2010 passed by Sri Anand Kumar Singh, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Patna, in Complaint Case No. 1571 (C) of 2007. By the said order learned Magistrate has rejected the petition filed under Section 245 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for discharge of the petitioners.
(2.) Short fact of the case is that opposite party no. 2 filed a complaint in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna, on 28.5.2007 disclosing therein that he was married with Amrita Kumari, daughter of petitioner no.1. The marriage was solemnized at the complainant's house i.e. Rishi Lodge, Ashram Gali, Shastrinagar, Patna, according to Hindu rites and rituals and after marriage he and victim had applied for registration of their marriage before Marriage Officer, Raghunathpur, Purulia. Subsequently, marriage certificate was also granted. Due to the said marriage accused persons of the complaint petition, who are father, mother and relatives of so-called wife of complainant became aggrieved and tried to take life of both the complainant and the victim. Many other facts have also been disclosed. It was alleged that accused persons subsequently committed the offence of abortion of child of Amrita Kumari. After noticing he tried to contact Amrita Kumari. Thereafter, accused persons asked him to come near botanical garden gate on 26.5.2007 at 7.00 A.M. When the complainant went there he saw all the accused persons present there along with Amrita Kumari. Then he demanded his child. Thereafter, all the accused persons assaulted him badly with fats and fists. In the said occurrence it was alleged that petitioner no. 1 snatched his golden chain and accused no. 4 i.e. petitioner no. 4 took money bag from the pocket of the petitioner containing Rs. 5,000/. After filing of the complaint petition and conducting inquiry cognizance order was passed. At the stage of charge a petition was filed for discharge on behalf of the petitioners which was rejected on 10.12.2010, and same has been impugned in the present petition.
(3.) Sri Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel who was assisted by Sri Ajay Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioners, at the very outset submits that the present complaint petition was filed maliciously and to pressurize the petitioners in a kidnapping case i.e. Gardanibagh (Shastrinagar) P.S.Case No. 189 of 2006, which was registered on 19.2.2006 against the complainant/ opposite party no. 2. The said case was registered for the offences under Sections 363, 365, 366 of the Indian Penal Code and subsequently Sections 376, 366(A), 342/34 of the Indian Penal Code was added in the F.I.R He submits that the learned court below has committed serious error in not discharging the petitioners. He submits that the complainant / opposite party no. 2 was made accused for kidnapping minor daughter of petitioner no. 1 namely Amrita Kumari. Since she was missing, a report was lodged on 14.2.2006 in the Shastrinagar Police Station and subsequently after noticing that the daughter of the petitioner no. 1 was kidnapped and was in confinement of the accused persons in village - Dehuli, Police Station - Dulhin Bazar, Patna, he (petitioner no.1) filed an application before Officer - In- Charge, Shastrinagar Police Station on 19.2.2006 and as such F.I.R. vide Gardanibagh (Shastrinagar) P.S. Case No.189 of 2006 was registered for offences as indicated above. It was disclosed in the F.I.R. that few days before the occurrence the opposite party no. 2 (Amarjeet Kumar) was slapped by the daughter of petitioner no. 1 since the opposite party no. 2 had misbehaved with his daughter Amrita Kumari. This information was earlier given by his daughter but same was not taken seriously.