ORDER :

Heard Mr. Arun Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashistha, learned A.P.P. for the opposite party-State.

2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard on merit.

3. The petitioners have filed this petition for quashing of entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dated 03.04.2021 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gumla in G.R. No.307 of 2021 (Gumla P.S. Case No.354 of 2020) by which the learned court below has taken cognizance for the offence under Sections 341/323/307/498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and process has been issued against the petitioners.

4. The prosecution case has been lodged on the basis of the complaint petition filed by the informant/opposite party no.2 before the learned court below stating therein that she was married with petitioner no.1 on 15.04.2019 as per Hindu rites and rituals. After marriage, opposite party no.2 live in her matrimonial house for six months, thereafter, she was tortured by the petitioners by saying that she belongs from pauper family and she is a Bajhin (issueless) lady. In the month of April, the petitioners assaulted opposite party no.2 and ousted her from the house, as such a Panchayati was held in the village, but the matter was not settled. Thereafter, opposite party no.2 made a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Gumla, who referred the matter to the Mahila Police Station, where both the parties were called and settled the dispute and thereafter the petitioners had taken opposite party no.2 to the house, but after one week, they again started torturing upon the victim and on 13.08.2020 after some altercation mother-in-law (petitioner no.3) started strangulation upon the victim and petitioner nos. 1 and 2 assaulted upon her. However, on hulla people of nearby came and save her and took her hospital for her treatment. The aforesaid complaint petition was referred to the concern police station by the learned court below for registering the F.I.R. under the provision of Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and investigation over the matter, accordingly the F.I.R. has been registered against the petitioners for the offence under Sections 341/323/307/498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and after investigation, cognizance has been taken vide order dated 03.04.2021.

5. Mr. Arun Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have not committed such offence, as alleged against them and in spite of that, cognizance has been taken against the petitioners. He further submits that the case under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code is not made out against the petitioners and Sections 307 of the Indian Penal Code is also not attracted as injury report is not serious in nature. He also submits that the case of the petitioners is fully covered in light of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Priyanka Srivastava and another v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, reported in (2015) 6 SCC 287.

6. On perusal of the complaint petition on the basis of which the F.I.R. has been lodged, it transpires that there are sufficient materials on the record and there are allegations against the petitioners. The injury report dated 13.08.2020 is also on the record. In the cognizance order, the trial court has applied its mind and the cognizance was taken after perusing the charge-sheet, case records and case diary. The mens rea can only be decided at the time of trial and not at the stage of issuing summons. When prosecution relies upon the materials, strict standard of proof is not to be applied at the stage of issuance of summons nor to examine the probable defence which the accused may take. All that the Court is required to do