N.M. Kasliwal, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned public prosecutor. On a report lodged by Ali Ram at the Police Station, Patna a case was registered under Section 147, 379, 429 324 and 323 IPC. Station House Officer after investigation found that no offence was made out under Sections 379 and 427 IPC. The Station House Officer therefore, submitted a charge sheet against three accused persons namely Manna Ram, Bichhu Ram, Ramu Ram for offences under Sections 323 and 324 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. The learned Magistrate vide his order dated 14-10-1980 took cognizance against the four petitioners also and issued bailable warrants against them. The four accused petitioners Smt Janki Smt. Shanti, Smt. Sarwan and Smt. Kesar against whom cognizance has been taken by the learned Magistrate and has issued bailable warrants have riled this petition under section 482 CrPC for quashing the order of the learned Magistrate dated 14-10-80.
2. The learned Public Prosecutor frankly conceded that as regards petitioners Smt. Sarwan and Smt. Kesar there was no iota of evidence and none of the prosecution witnesses have named their presence at the time of occurrence. It appears that the learned Magistrate without applying his mind to the evidence on records passed order taking cognizance against the two petitioners. The order of the learned Magistrate as such taking cognizance against the petitioners Smt. Sarwan and Smt. Kesar is totally wrong, all illegal and is quashed. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that Smt. Janki and Smt. Shanti, petitioners have been unnecessarily dragged in the case. At this stage it is difficult to take into consideration the merits of the case. From the statement of the prosecution witnesses it appears that the presence of wife of Bichhu Ram and wife of Ramu Ram has been mentioned at the scene of occurrence. It would be for the trial court to decide whether any act was committed by these ladies or not. The learned counsel for the petitioners has also pointed out an irregularity in the impugned order that the learned Magistrate without mentioning the names of the accused persons has passed order that the wives of Kedar, Pooran, Bichhu Ram and Ramu Ram be summoned by bailable warrants in the sum of Rs. 500/-. This objection technically appears to be sound in as much as the learned Magistrate while taking cognizance and issuing a bailable warrant should have mentioned the names of the accused persons specifically and not merely that they are wives of such and such persons. However the names of the wife of Bichhu Ram and Ramu Ram have been mentioned by the petitioners themselves in the petitition under Section 482 and in my opinion it is merely an irregularity committed by the learned Magistrate.
3. In the result this petition is partly allowed. The order of the learned Magistrate dated 14-10-80 taking cognizance against petitioners Smt. Sarwan and Smt. Kesar is hereby quashed and so far as it relates to Smt. Janki wife of Bichhu Ram and Smt. Shanti wife of Ramu Ram, is maintained Copy of this order be sent to the learned Magistrate immediately.