The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Magistrate is not required to record reasons for issuing process at the stage of taking cognizance based on the police report. The judgment also emphasized the need for the Magistrate to apply judicial discretion and examine the materials before taking cognizance.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard the parties.

2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Chas Mahila P.S. Case No.18 of 2021 (S), corresponding to G.R. No.528 of 2022 including the order taking cognizance dated 20.11.2021 whereby and where under, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro has issued summons to the petitioners.

3. The brief fact of the case is that the petitioners being the relatives of the husband of the informant treated the informant with cruelty in connection of demand of dowry. There is specific allegation against the petitioners of perpetrating physical and mental cruelty upon the informant and there is also allegation that they were repeatedly and continuously assaulting the informant to fulfill the demand of dowry. There is specific allegation against the petitioner nos. 1 and 3 of outraging the modesty of the informant and using criminal force to disrobe her. Further there is allegation that the petitioners have driven the victim out of the matrimonial house for her failure to fulfill demand of dowry of the petitioners. There are several specific instances, the dates of four different instances has been narrated in the First Information Report regarding the cruelty being perpetrated upon the informant by the petitioners.

4. The police after investigation of the case did not send up the petitioners for trial and submitted final form mentioning therein that upon secret and indirect investigation, the police did not file any material showing the involvement of the petitioners in the case. Hence, police did not send up the petitioners for trial because of lack of evidence against them.

5. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro differed from the final form submitted by police and on the basis of the contents in the FIR and the supplementary case diary found prima facie case against the petitioners for having committed the offence punishable under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code. As the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro vide order dated 20.11.2021 had already taken the cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code; hence vide order dated 17.05.2022, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro observed that the cognizance order dated 20.11.2021 be read in respect of the petitioners also.

6. The trial has already been started against the husband of the informant in which one witness namely Imamuddin Ansari has been examined as P.W.1 and the said Imamuddin Ansari has supported the case of the prosecution and has categorically stated that P.W.1 went to the matrimonial house of the victim; on hearing hue and cry, he entered into the house and saw five accused persons including the four petitioners of this criminal miscellaneous petition; on 02.05.2021 at 09:00 am were abusing the informant and assaulted her and the petitioner nos.1 and 3 were trying to outrage the modesty of the informant by tearing her salwar. He has also stated that on 25.04.2021 on the pretext of compromise and settlement meeting, the five accused persons of the case including the four petitioners were abusing and assaulting the informant and were torturing her mentally and physically. He has stated that he knows all the accused persons of the case including the four petitioners of this criminal miscellaneous petition who were not present in the court on the date of his examination is a witness.

7. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro in a mechanical manner without applying judicial mind and without any cogent reason, vide the said order dated 17.05.2022 has ordered that the cognizance taken by it vide order dated 20.11.2021 be read against the petitioners as well. It further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that continuity of the said order will amount to abuse of pro