1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. This application has been filed for clashing the order dated 10.7.2004 passed in Complaint Case No. 300/04 by the learned SDJM (East), Muzaffarpur, whereby and where-under cognizance under Secs. 406 and 498A of Indian Penal Code as also Secs. 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act has been taken against the petitioners.

3. The facts of the case ate as follows: One Dr. Suresh Kumar Singh, father of Nirja Singh, had filed a complaint case before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, bearing Complaint case No. 300/2004 on 16.2.2004, for the commission of /offences punishable under Secs. 406, 420 / 120B, 498A, 323, 324 and 307 of Indian Penal Code as also Secs. 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

4. According to the complaint petition, marriage of Nirja Singh, daughter of the complainant, was solemnised on 10.5.2001 with Rajeev Sharma, Petitioner No. 3 after observance of Hindu rites and rituals at their place in Mohalla-Jhuranchapra, P.S. Brahampur, in the district of Muzaffarpur. Before negotiation of such marriage, father of the groom, Petitioner No. 2 Pramod Narayan Sharma, has given an impression that his son Rajeev Sharma is a qualified Software Engineer, is working in a reputed Software Company in Cardiff in United Kingdom, namely, Living Stones as Technical Manager and getting handsome salary and requested the complainant for early negotiation of the marriage on the plea that his son was coming over to the native village Motihari and due to paucity of time, final settlement of marriage may be done within 2-3 days. As such, the complainant approached their native village Laxmipur, Motihari and he had talk with Pramod Narain Sharma and Rani Brinda Sharma, parents of the groom, as also the groom who had reiterated their early version so far Software Degree and working as Technical Manager in the aforesaid reputed company at Cardiff, United Kingdom, was concerned. Necessary formalities were observed in view of the fact that there was pressure for early marriage. But intelligently petitioners/side-tracked the issue regarding professional qualification of the groom and fixed 6.5.2001 as the date of "Faldan and 10.5.2001 as the date of marriage and the marriage was performed on that date. In between the period of Faldan and marriage when all the relations of the complainant were intimated regarding such marriage, the complainant was called in Motihari by the accused-petitioners and pressurised the complainant to part with Rupees Eight lacs cash besides costly and valuable presentation such as Gold (sic), Gold Chain, costly Wrist Watch, Washing Machine, Color T.V. and valuable Clothes etc. The complain (sic) expressed his inability but on being extended threat and seeing the family prestige, the complainant gave presentations of Gold Ring, Gold Chain, Silver utensils, suit lengths etc. Mother of the groam was presented Gold ornaments, Costly Banarasi Saree worth Rs. 11,000.00 and cash Rs. 1,000.00 . Father of the groom was given presentation by way of Rs. 5,000.00 cash in addition to presentation of Rs. 21,000.00 at the time of Faldan and Tilak. Further presentation of Rupees Five Lacs was given by the complainant to the parents of the groom on the assurance that this amount would be deposited in the name of Nirja Singh. But even then, there was persistent demand of Rupees Three Lacs as remaining dowry. In this way, articles worth Rs. 2,26000.00 were given to the grooms side by the complainant. Not only that, even Rupees Two Lacs out of Rupees Three Lacs so demanded, was received by the accused-petitioners by virtue of Draft of Rupees One Lac and One Lac in cash. Photo-copy of the Draft has been annexed with the complaint petition. But even then remaining amount of Rupees One Lac was again demanded after marriage with the saying that the groom should also be given Diamond garland (chain).

5. Further allegation is that there was huge presentation to Nirja Singh by the close relativ