SANJEET KUMAR @ SANJEEV KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for certain relief i.e. for quashment of the order dated 5.9.2005, by which cognizance of the offence was taken under Sections 498A/304(B) of the Indian Penal Code as also under Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

(2.) Counsel for the opposite party No. 2 has appeared after receipt of the notice.

(3.) Mr. Mazumdar, the learned senior counsel, at the outset, submitted that he is not pressing the prayer that has been made in the main petition for quashment of the order dated 5.9.2005. As a matter of fact, Petitioners had not surrendered in the Court. By filing I.A. No. 464 of 2011, Petitioners though requested that they be enlarged on bail on surrender before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-I, Hazaribagh in view of the earlier orders dated 5.9.2005, 5.2.2007 and 11.6.2009 but the Petitioners now want that they should be protected on their surrender before the Court concerned as the processes have been issued under Sections 82 and 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against them.