JUDGMENT : 1. Heard the parties. 2. The petitioners have filed this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Complaint Case No. 113 of 2017. They have also prayed for quashing of the cognizance order dated 03.04.2017 passed by Court of Sri Edith Horo, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1 st Class, Giridih by virtue of learned Magistrate has taken cognizance for the offence under Section 498A of the I.P.C. and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against all the petitioners. 3. The petitioner no. 01 namely Md. Sahabuddin is father-in-law of the Opposite Party No. 02 while the petitioner no. 02 Shakila Khatoon is mother-in-law, the petitioner no. 03 Parween Khatoon @ Parveen Khaton is married daughter of the petitioner nos. 01 & 02, the petitioner nos. 04 & 05 namely Md Siraj and Md Riyaz are brother-in-law of the Opposite Party No. 02 and the petitioner no. 06 namely Md. Mustak is husband of the daughter of the petitioner nos. 01 & 02. The case of the Opposite Party No. 02 is that she was married to Md. Prawej on 07.12.2014 according to Muslim customs. After the marriage of the Opposite Party No. 02, the accused persons started demanding Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rs. Two Lakhs Only.) alongwith a motorcycle. To enforce the demand, she was tortured. It is also alleged that she had to undergo abortion due to assault by the accused persons. Finally, on 17.08.2016, she was assaulted and driven away from her matrimonial home.The statement of the Opposite Party No. 02 Afsana Parween @Shabnam was recorded during the enquiry, in which she stated that after marriage, the accused persons started demanding Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rs. Two Lakhs Only.) alongwith a motorcycle. She was assaulted to enforce the demand and due to assault by the petitioners, she had to undergo abortion. She has further stated that finally in the year 2016, she was assaulted and driven away from her matrimonial home. To the Court question, she has stated that only her husband, mother-in-law, father-in-law and brothers-in- law (Brother of husband) reside in the matrimonial home. The enquiry witness E.W.-01, Jiyaul Rahman, has supported the statement of the Opposite Party No. 02 in his S.A. To the Court question, he has also stated that her husband, mother-in-law, father-in-law and brother-in-law (Devar) reside in her matrimonial home. E.W.-02 namely Md. The enquiry witness E.W.-01, Jiyaul Rahman, has supported the statement of the Opposite Party No. 02 in his S.A. To the Court question, he has also stated that her husband, mother-in-law, father-in-law and brother-in-law (Devar) reside in her matrimonial home. E.W.-02 namely Md. Amzad and E.W.-03 namely Farzana Parveen have supported the allegation that the Opposite Party No. 02 was assaulted by the accused persons due to which she had to undergo abortion. 4. From the aforesaid discussion, it is apparent that the Opposite Party No. 02 and her witnesses have stated that after marriage her in-laws have demanded Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rs. Two Lakhs Only.) alongwith a motorcycle due to which she was tortured and she had also to undergo abortion and ultimately, she was driven out from her matrimonial home. She has made general allegation against the petitioners. From the answer to the Court question, it is apparent that the petitioner no. 03 Parween Khatoon @ Parveen Khaton and the petitioner no. 06 Md. Mustak, do not reside in her matrimonial home. She has not made any specific allegation against them in her S.A. nor has any witness made any specific allegation against them. 5. In view of the aforesaid facts, I am of the opinion that prima facie case for the offence under Section 498A of the I.P.C. is made out against the petitioner no. 01 Md. Sahabuddin, petitioner no. 02 Shakila Khatoon, petitioner no. 04 Md Siraj and petitioner no. 05 Md Riyaz. However, no prima facie case is made out against the petitioner no. 03 Parween Khatoon @ Parveen Khaton and the petitioner no. 06 Md. Mustak as they do not reside in the matrimonial home of the Opposite Party No. 02. 6. Accordingly, order taking cognizance of the learned J.M.F.C., Giridih, finding the prima facie case to be true for the offence under Section 498A of the I.P.C. and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the petitioner no. 01 Md. Sahabuddin, petitioner no. 02 Shakila Khatoon, petitioner no. 04 Md Siraj and petitioner no. 05 Md Riyaz is hereby affirmed. However, order taking cognizance by learned J.M.F.C., Giridih, finding the prima facie case to be true for the offence under Section 498A of the I.P.C. and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the petitioner no. 03 Parween Khatoon @ Parveen Khaton and the petitioner no. 06 Md. 05 Md Riyaz is hereby affirmed. However, order taking cognizance by learned J.M.F.C., Giridih, finding the prima facie case to be true for the offence under Section 498A of the I.P.C. and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the petitioner no. 03 Parween Khatoon @ Parveen Khaton and the petitioner no. 06 Md. Mustak is hereby set aside. 7. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is partly allowed with the aforesaid observation. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.