##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

1. Ursila Toppo, aged about 69 years, w/o Micheal Toppo, 2. Savita Soni Toppo, aged about 38 years, d/o Micheal Toppo Both r/o Lowadih, Harijan Basti, P.O. & P.S.-Namkum, Dist.-

Ranchi, Jharkhand .... Petitioners Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Rekha Ekka, d/o late Patrik Ekka, w/o Sujeet Madhukar Toppo, r/o Prem Nagar, Madhuban Toli, P.O.+P.S.-

Lohardaga, Dist.-Lohardaga, Jharkhand …. Opp. Parties P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY …..

For the Petitioners : Mr. Suraj Verma, Advocate : Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, Spl. P.P.

For O.P. No.2 : None …..

By the Court:-

I.A. No.15684 of 2026

1. Heard the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this interlocutory application has been filed with the prayer to amend the Cr.M.P. No. 942 of 2026 by incorporating the additional prayer to quash the order dated 10.08.2026 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga in connection with Lohardaga Mahila P.S. Case No. 23 of 2024, corresponding to G.R. No. 311 of 2025 whereby and where under, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga has framed charges against the petitioners in paragraph no.1 and prayer portion of this criminal miscellaneous petition and also to insert paragraph no.19A between paragraph no.19 and 20 in support of the said additional prayer. It is next submitted that the proposed amendment was necessitated because of the developments which took place after filing of this criminal miscellaneous petition and the proposed amendment will not change the nature and character of this criminal miscellaneous petition. It is lastly submitted that unless the proposed amendment is allowed, the petitioners will be highly prejudiced.

3. Considering the aforesaid facts, the prayer for amendment made in this interlocutory application is allowed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners file the said consolidated criminal miscellaneous petition. Keep the same in the record.

5. This interlocutory application is disposed of accordingly.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)

1. Heard the parties.

2. Though notice has validly been served upon the opposite party no.2 yet no one turns up on behalf of the opposite party no.2 in-spite of repeated calls.

3. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., 2023 with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 21.08.2025 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga in connection with Lohardaga Mahila P.S. Case No. 23 of 2024, corresponding to G.R. No. 311 of 2025, whereby and where under, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 85, 115(2), 126(2), 352 and 351 (2) of the B.N.S., 2023 as also the order dated 10.08.2026 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga in connection with the said case; by which the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga has framed charges for the aforesaid offences.

4. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioner no.1 being the mother-in-law and the petitioner no.2 being the sister-in-law did not allow the informant to enter into her matrimonial house at Lowadih and insulted her. The main grievance of the informant is against her husband being co-accused-Sujeet Madhukar Toppo. The allegation of assault and taking of dowry is against the husband of the informant and the allegation of threatening is against the lady namely Artima Xess with whom the informant alleges her husband to be having illicit relationship and demand of Rs.3,00,000/- is made against her.

5. On the basis of the written report submitted by the informant, police registered Lohardaga Mahila P.S. Case No. 23 of 2024 and took up investigation of the case. After completion of investigation, police submitted charge sheet inter alia agai