D.N.UPADHYAY, J. - (1.) THIS Cr. Misc. Petition has been filed for quashing of the order dated 19.03.2009 passed by Shri Shambhu Law Saw, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class at Dhanbad in connection with Complaint Case No. 1285 of 2008 whereby the learned Magistrate has directed the petitioner to face trial for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A)/304 (B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
(2.) The fact emerging behind the filing of this Cr. M.P. is that the respondent No. 2 lodged a written report at Sadar Police Station, Dhanbad on 04.07.2006 alleging therein that his daughter Anjani Kumari Sinha was married with Suryadhar on 21.05.2005. The daughter of the informant was not happy with her conjugal life and she was subjected to torture and treated with cruelty for want of dowry and lastly she died in her parent's house on 30.06.2006. The informant and his family members have levelled allegation that the death of Anjani Kumari Sinha was not natural rather she died otherwise than under normal circumstances due to some medicines and mal -treatment provided to her at her matrimonial home. After registration of the case, the investigation proceeded ahead and after completion, charge -sheet against accused persons, namely, Jairani Devi, Dhirendra Narayan @ Dhirendra Kumar and Suryadhar was filed on 04.07.2006. The name of the present petitioner was mentioned in the not sent up column and therefore, the learned C.J.M. took cognizance and directed the charge -sheeted accused persons to appear and face trial. At the same time, a protest petition was also filed by the complainant stating therein that the present petitioner, who is a Doctor, was suggested some medicines, as a result some disease developed and that was the reason Anjani Kumari Sinha died. After hearing the parties, learned C.J.M. passed an order on 17.06.2008 observing therein that cognizance has been taken against the charge -sheeted accused and therefore, a separate complaint may be filed, if the informant so chooses and with this observation, the protest petition was rejected. Thereafter, the respondent No. 2 filed separate complaint vide C.P. Case No. 1285/2008 in the court of learned C.J.M., which was transferred to the Court of Judicial Magistrate for holding enquiry, as required under Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the learned Judicial Magistrate held enquiry and after considering the materials available before him, passed order on 24.9.2008 mentioning therein that the complainant shall be at liberty to file a petition under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. before the court where the original case of other accused is pending and accordingly, the complaint case was dismissed.
(3.) THEREAFTER , the complainant preferred Criminal Revision No. 302/2008 before the learned Sessions Judge against the order dated 24.9.2008 passed in C.P. Case No. 1285/2008. After hearing the parties, learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. -VI, Dhanbad has passed an order on 7.2.2009 by which the revision was allowed and the learned Magistrate was directed to consider the material available before him afresh and pass order in accordance with law. In receipt of the said order passed in said Criminal Revision, the learned Judicial Magistrate took cognizance on 19.03.2009 and directed the petitioner to face trial and hence this petition.;