Judgment Abhijit Sinha, J. 1. The four petitioners have filed this application for quashing of the entire criminal prosecution against them including the order dated 13.2.2007 passed by Sri B.K. Gupta, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ara, in Complaint Case No. 1707 of 2006 by which the learned Court below has taken cognizance of offence under Ss. 341, 323, 379 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. One Md. Tahir Hussain filed the aforesaid complaint on 7.11.2006, inter alia, alleging that he received information over telephone from his relatives that 10,000.00 rupees was urgently required and request was made to arrange for the same within a week and this he claims to have mentioned to his neighbours and even asked for funds from some of them. It is submitted that on 27.10.2006 while the complainant was going to give the money to his relative and reached near Mohalla Milki Anith he saw the accused persons variously armed with lethai weapons sitting and as he reached them, all the accused persons surrounded him and pointed their lethal weapons at him. It is said that the accused Wazir Alam was armed with a revolver, Shamsher Alam with a katta. Habibur Rahman with lathi and Bilquis Banc was armed with stone and they assaulted the complainant. It is further alleged that Md. Iliyas Hussain flashed out his chaku and rested it on the chest of the complainant whereas Md. Saukat Ali and Mustaque Ahmad @ Gabbar and Nasiruddin Asharfi @ Typist assaulted him with kicks and fists and forcibly took out Rs. 10,000.00 from his pocket snatched golden chain worth Rs. 6512.00 and when the people of the locality arrived the accused persons fled away. 3. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case and the learned Magistrate had erred in taking cognizance since he did not apply his mind judiciously on the materials available at the inquiry u/s. 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The falsity of the case would also be apparent from the fact that accused Bilquis Bano who happens to be the wife of the complainant had lodged a complaint against his misbehaviour and bad conduct before the Secretary and the Members of Anjuma Azharfia, Ashraf Nagar, Siliguri on 13.3.2005. The falsity of the case would also be apparent from the fact that accused Bilquis Bano who happens to be the wife of the complainant had lodged a complaint against his misbehaviour and bad conduct before the Secretary and the Members of Anjuma Azharfia, Ashraf Nagar, Siliguri on 13.3.2005. It was also submitted that it would be difficult to believe that the petitioners who are residents of Jalpaiguri District in West Bengal would come all the way from there to assault and snatch the money from the complainant at Ara. In this connection it was sought to be submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that even if the complainants story is to be believed then it is difficult to accept the fact that these petitioners belonging to Jalpaiguri had prior knowledge of the fact that the complainant would be travelling with the money on that day and they having made prior preparation were sitting and waiting for the complainant to arrive. The learned counsel for the petitioners also sought to impress that a meeting had been held on the complaint lodged by Bilquish Bano under the President-ship of the petitioner Shaukat Ali and all the members had unanimously resolved and directed the complainant to keep his wife with regard and respect and fulfill all her desires. 4. The learned counsel for O.P. No. 2 the complainant sought to support the impugned order by saying that the petitioners had, in fact, participated along with the other members in the alleged assault and had snatched the money from the complainant. However, he could not justify as to how the petitioners had prior information of the fact that the complainant would be travelling with all that money on that particular date. 5. Even the evidence adduced at the inquiry u/s. 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not appear to be conducive to the complainants case and no reason has been assigned for the delay of 10 days in filing the complaint petition. 6. The complainants story from the very narration itself appears to be a bundle of false statements and the probability/possibility of the petitioners, permanent residents of Jalpaiguri having participated in the alleged occurrence does not stand to reason. Apparently, to my mind, the prosecution of the petitioners herein appears to be an abuse of the process of the Court. 7. 6. The complainants story from the very narration itself appears to be a bundle of false statements and the probability/possibility of the petitioners, permanent residents of Jalpaiguri having participated in the alleged occurrence does not stand to reason. Apparently, to my mind, the prosecution of the petitioners herein appears to be an abuse of the process of the Court. 7. Accordingly, the impugned order, so far as the petitioners are concerned, is hereby quashed and the application is allowed.