Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.43951 of 2009 ====================================================== 1. Mahatam Yadav son of Kashi Yadav, 2. Akhilesh Yadav, Son of Satyanarayan Yadav, 3. Brijesh Yadav, Son of Vishwanath Yadav All residents of Village- Kabilaswa, P.S. Gopalpur, District- West Champaran .... .... Petitioners Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER --------------- 2 27-03-2012 Heard Sri Umesh Chandra Verma, learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt. Pronoti Singh, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. Three petitioners, who were named in Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 35 of 2006, have approached this Court against the order dated 07.04.2009 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran, whereby the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate differing with the police report has taken cognizance of offence under [STATUTE] and Section 27 of the Arms Act. In this case, the police after investigation submitted final report and also reported for prosecuting the informant under [STATUTE] for making false allegation. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43951 of 2009 (2) dt.27-03-2012 2 / 2 2 The learned Magistrate by the impugned order has taken cognizance differing with the police report and order of cognizance was passed in the year 2009. Learned counsel for the petitioners at the moment is not in a position to inform the Court as to whether charges have been framed or not. For just decision of the case, it is necessary to examine the entire case diary. It would not be appropriate for this Court, while exercising power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to examine the case diary at this stage. If so advised, the petitioners may take all the pleas, which have been taken in the present case, at the appropriate stage. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioners to take all the pleas, which have been taken in the present case, at the appropriate stage. The Court expects that if such petition is filed on behalf of the petitioners, the learned court below will examine the same as well as materials available in the case diary and thereafter pass order in accordance with law. With above observation and direction, the petition stands disposed of. NKS/- (Rakesh Kumar, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 182

Statute Text:
Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code. Giving false information to a public servant in order to cause him to use his lawful power to the injury or annoyance of any person. Whoever gives to any public servant any information which he knows or believes to be false, intending thereby to cause, or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause such public servant: to do or omit anything which such public servant ought not to do or omit if the true state of facts respecting which such information is given were known by him, or to use the lawful power of such public servant to the injury or annoyance of any person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.