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: 211

Statute Text:
Section 211 of the Indian Penal Code. False charge of offence made with intent to injure. Whoever, with intent to cause injury to any person, institutes or causes to be instituted any criminal proceeding against that person, or falsely charges any person with having committed an offence, knowing that there is no just or lawful ground for such proceeding or charge against that person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both; and if such criminal proceeding be instituted on a false charge of an offence punishable with death imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for seven years or upwards, shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.