Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.5732 of 2010 ====================================================== Sridhar Prasad Singh, son of Late Ajab Lal Singh, resident of Village- Rashidpur, P.S. Bath, P.O. Englishmal Khanpur, District-Bhagalpur .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Ajit Kumar S/O Anandi Das, resident of Village-Gangapur, P.S. Sultanganj, District-Bhagalpur .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER ------------------- 4 06-07-2012 Heard Sri Vivekanand „Vivek‟, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Syed M. Ashraf, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of Opp.Party no.2/informant and Sri Pradip Narayan Kunwar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash an order dated 29.09.2009 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur, whereby cognizance of offence under Sections 406,467,471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code was taken. The petitioner further makes a prayer to quash order dated 13.11.2009 whereby the transferee Magistrate has further taken cognizance of offence under Section 3(i)(x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes ( Prevention of Atrocities) Act( hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST Act”). Firstly, it was argued that in one case, two cognizance Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.5732 of 2010 (4) dt.06-07-2012 2 / 2 2 orders cannot be passed and, as such, second order dated 13.11.2009 is liable to be set aside. It has further been submitted that there is no material showing involvement of the petitioner. In mechanical manner, the learned Magistrate has passed order of cognizance. I have perused the order dated 13.11.2009, which makes it clear that while passing order of cognizance on 29.09.2009, due to clerical mistake provision under Section 3(i)(x) of SC/ST Act was not recorded , which has been corrected by order dated 13.11.2009 taking it as a clerical mistake. So far making correction of clerical mistake is concerned, there is no bar and, as such, there is no error in the order dated 13.11.2009. Similarly, after registering the F.I.R., the police investigated the case and chargesheet was submitted under [STATUTE] and Section 3(i)(x) of SC/ST Act. The learned Magistrate after submission of chargesheet has passed order of cognizance. I do not find any defect in either of the orders. The petition stands dismissed. NKS/- (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.