JUDGMENT : ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J. 1. Heard the parties. 2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the order dated 22.03.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Dhanbad whereby and where under, learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Dhanbad has dismissed the Protest-cum-Complaint Case No. 3144 of 2023 as the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Dhanbad found the case of the prosecution to be improbable one. 3. The brief fact of the case is that the petitioner filed Complaint Case No. 4590 of 2022 in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad and the same was referred to police under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. basing upon which Bankmore (Bhuli O.P.) P.S. Case No. 145 of 2022 was registered. Police investigated the case and after investigation of the case, police found that the allegation against the accused persons that the accused persons in criminal conspiracy with each other and in furtherance of common intention with each other trespassed to the house of the informant and forcibly made the daughters of the informant remove their clothes and touched their private parts after making them naked and capturing the same by making a video and demanded extortion from the husband of the petitioner, to be not true. On the basis of the statement of the independent witnesses and the technical evidence, police found the allegation against the accused persons to be not true and did not send up the accused persons for trial. 4. The petitioner filed a protest petition which was registered as C.P. Case No. 3144 of 2023 reiterating the said allegation. The petitioner supported the protest petition by her statement under solemn affirmation. The petitioner also examined her husband who was not present at the time of alleged occurrence as enquiry witness no. 1 and her daughters as enquiry witness no.2 and 3. Her daughter who is the eye witness to the occurrence and who has been examined as enquiry witness no.2 has stated that the accused persons of the case being the opposite party nos. 2 to 7 trespassed to the house of the complainant, terrorized her and told her to remove her clothes. She removed her clothes. Her daughter who is the eye witness to the occurrence and who has been examined as enquiry witness no.2 has stated that the accused persons of the case being the opposite party nos. 2 to 7 trespassed to the house of the complainant, terrorized her and told her to remove her clothes. She removed her clothes. The six accused persons being the opposite party nos.2 to 7 touched her body and prepared a video and while going back they told her not to disclose the occurrence to anyone and threatened that otherwise they will make the video viral. The other daughter of the petitioner was also examined as E.W.-3 and she is also an eye witness to the occurrence. She has also stated about all the accused persons of the case being the opposite party nos.2 to 7 touching the body of the enquiry witness no.2. 5. The learned Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases, Dhanbad vide order dated 22.03.2023 considered the facts of the case and found the allegation to be unnatural and improbable as no person can touch naked body and private part of a young girl in presence of his own mother and four other persons and did not find sufficient ground to proceed against the opposite party nos.2 to 7 and dismissed the protest petition. 6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the act of the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Dhanbad in dismissing the protest petition was an erroneous one which has been arrived at by not seeing that at the time of occurrence only a prima facie case is to be seen. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as made in this criminal miscellaneous petition be allowed. 7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 to 7 on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer as made in this criminal miscellaneous petition and submits that E.W.3 has categorically stated that the video which was prepared has not been seen by anyone in paragraph no. 5 of his statement. In paragraph no.2 she has stated that police called the father to the police station and paid Rs.10,000/- to her father. It is next submitted by the learned Addl. 5 of his statement. In paragraph no.2 she has stated that police called the father to the police station and paid Rs.10,000/- to her father. It is next submitted by the learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 to 7 that E.W.1-the husband of the petitioner has categorically stated that quarrel between them was because, the accused persons of the case, gave the phone number of the petitioner to some unknown persons, who were making phone calls to the petitioner and when the daughter of the petitioner was receiving the phone, the unknown person was talking to her and the same was the reason for quarrel. The E.W.-1-the husband of the petitioner further stated that police called him to the police station and got the compromise done and ensured that Rs.10,000/- is paid to the husband of the petitioner and a document was prepared in this respect in the police station. The petitioner in her statement on solemn affirmation has also stated about the reason for quarrel being that the accused persons of the case gave the phone number of the petitioner to some unknown persons and they were making calls in the said phone number. It is further submitted by the learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 to 7 that from the materials thus available in the record, it is crystal clear that there was some minor quarrel which has been compromised in the police station and the petitioner has been compensated but with greed for more money, a serious case has been made out by the petitioner; which is highly improbable as the victim had not stated about any of the persons touching her private parts. The alleged victim has only stated about all the accused persons touching her body. There is no rhyme or reason as to why a mother, her son along with four other persons will touch the body of a young girl after making her remove her clothes and certainly, nobody will make video and create evidence of committing an offence by himself. It is lastly submitted that therefore, the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Dhanbad has rightly dismissed the complaint as improbable. Hence, there being no illegality in the said order, this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit be dismissed. 8. It is lastly submitted that therefore, the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Dhanbad has rightly dismissed the complaint as improbable. Hence, there being no illegality in the said order, this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit be dismissed. 8. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going through the materials in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Pooja Ravinder Devidasani vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. reported in (2014) 16 SCC 1 that Magistrate is not a silent spectator at the time of recording of preliminary evidence before summoning the accused. The Magistrate has to carefully scrutinize the evidence brought on record and may even himself put questions to the complainant and his witnesses to elucidate answers to find out the truthfulness of the allegation or otherwise and then examine the offence as if prima facie case committed by all or any of the accused because summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious one. The said principle of law is also squarely applicable to the Special Judge who has being vested with the power of taking cognizance by a special statute like the POCSO Act. 9. Now coming to the facts of the case, the undisputed fact remains that minor quarrel between the petitioner and the accused persons of the case, who are opposite party nos.2 to 7 of this criminal miscellaneous petition, took place because some undesirable persons making call though the mobile phone of the petitioner to her daughter. The undisputed fact remains that there was a compromise in the police station and Rs.10,000/- was even paid to the husband of the petitioner. In this backdrop, the claim of the petitioner that the accused persons of the case; who are the opposite party nos. 2 to 7 of this criminal miscellaneous petition, who are closely related to each other, including the mother and her son, will trespass to the house of the victim and touch the body of a 13 year girl together, by making her remove her clothes and making her naked. 2 to 7 of this criminal miscellaneous petition, who are closely related to each other, including the mother and her son, will trespass to the house of the victim and touch the body of a 13 year girl together, by making her remove her clothes and making her naked. So, in this background, this Court is of the considered view that the order passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Dhanbad, who had the advantage of seeing the demeanour of the witnesses, in dismissing the protest petition cannot be termed as perverse or an illegality warranting interference of this Court in exercise of the power under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. 10. Accordingly, this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit is dismissed.