JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Mr. J.S. Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mrs. Vandana Bharti, the learned counsel for the State and Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the O.P.No.2. 2. This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding arising out of C.P.Case No.1249 of 2018, pending in the court of learned Judicial magistrate, 1st Class, Bokaro and order dated 03.02.2020 whereby the cognizance under section 354D, 376, 511, 509, 409, 166A of IPC has been taken, pending in the learned same court. 3. The O.P.No.2 has filed the complaint case alleging therein that the complainant is a widow who reside with her three children and earns her livelihood as a collection agent of Sahara India. The accused Amit Kumar is the agent in Sahara India and used to visit the house of the complainant. ON 26.08.2018 accused Amit Kumar has teased the complainant and later on felt sorry for his conduct. ON 11.9.2018 the accused Amit Kumar tried to forcibly establish physical relation with the complainant which was protested by her and on alarm accused fled away. On 12.9.2018 complaint filed an application at Mahila police station, Bokaro and both accused and the complainant was called at police station on 14.09.2018 and later on both were sent back and no FIR was instituted. The complainant had called witness no.4 Mithilesh Pal and narrated the entire episode where upon witness no.4 told her that accused Amit Kumar was released by the officer in charge of Mahila Police Station after taking bribe of Rs.25000/-. On 25.9.2018 complainant again went to police station and demanded the receipt of her application where the officers pressurized the complainant to sign on blank paper which the complainant refused and returned back. The complaint about entire occurrence was reported to the Police Superintendent, Bokaro but till date no positive response has been received by the complaint. 4. Mr. J.S. Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a lady police officer and on that time she was Incharge of Mahila P.S., Bokaro. He submits that in discharging the duty on the basis of the complaint she has called upon the accused namely Amit Kumar in the police station and in the police station compromise has taken place between the complainant and the accused Amit Kumar and the accused was released on P.R.bond. He submits that in discharging the duty on the basis of the complaint she has called upon the accused namely Amit Kumar in the police station and in the police station compromise has taken place between the complainant and the accused Amit Kumar and the accused was released on P.R.bond. He submits that the learned court by order dated 3.7.2019 directed the complainant to obtain sanction under section 197 Cr.P.C. as the petitioner was discharging official duty. He further submits that however learned court has taken cognizance without looking into the order dated 3.7.2019. He further submits that Superintendent of Police, Bokaro has also inquired into the matter and submitted report contained in Annexure 4. He further submits that for taking cognizance under section 166A of the IPC sanction may not be necessary but for others sections also no case against the petitioner is made out and what are materials against the petitioner is not disclosed in the cognizance order. 5. Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the O.P.No.2 submits that there are allegations and the complainant has stated about the occurrence. 6. Mr. Vandana Bharti, the learned State counsel submits that there are allegations and cognizance has rightly been taken. On perusal of the complaint petition it transpires that allegations is made against Amit Kumar who used to visit house of the complainant. The petitioner on the complaint of the O.P.No.2 took action and called upon accused Amit Kumar and in view of compromise between the O.P.No.2 and Amit Kumar, he was released on P.R.bond which is also disclosed in the enquiry report of the Superintendent of Police as contained in Annexure-4. For taking cognizance under section 166A IPC sanction under section 197 Cr.PC may not be necessary but so far other sections are concerned, sections 354D, 376, 511, 509, 409 of IPC so far the petitioner is concerned, is not made out looking into the entire allegation made in the complaint. 7. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding arising out of C.P.Case No.1249 of 2018 and order dated 03.02.2020, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bokaro, so far this petitioner is concerned, is hereby quashed. 8. 7. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding arising out of C.P.Case No.1249 of 2018 and order dated 03.02.2020, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bokaro, so far this petitioner is concerned, is hereby quashed. 8. It is made clear that this order will govern only the case of the petitioner namely Sangeeta @ Sangita and so far as accused Amit Kumar is concerned, this Court has not quashed the case against Amit Kumar. 9. Cr.M.P. No.1272 of 2020 is disposed of. 10. I.A, if any, is also disposed of.