Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.20350 of 2011 Chandra Shekhar Thakur, son of Ram Lochan Thakur, Resident of village Kuari, P.S. Sursand, District Sitamarhi. Versus The State Of Bihar ---------------------------------- 3. 13.1.2012. Heard Shri Pushpendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri M.K. Khare, learned Additional Public Prosecutor. In the present case, petitioner has made a prayer for quashing of an order dated 6.6.2006 whereby the learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Pupri at Sitamarhi has taken cognizance of the offences under [STATUTE] in Sursand P.S. Case No.7 of 2004 dated 28.1.2004/G.R. No.26 of 2004. In paragraph-9 of the petition, it has been stated that in this case, charges have already been framed on 1.3.2011. In view of the facts and circumstances, no order can be passed for quashing of order of cognizance. The petition stands dismissed. N.H./ ( Rakesh Kumar,J.)

Applicable IPC Section: 471

Statute Text:
Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code. Using as genuine a forged document which is known to be forged. Whoever fraudulently or dishonestly uses as genuine any document which he knows or has reason to believe to be a forged document, shall be punished in the same manner as if he had forged such document.