Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.40340 of 2010 ====================================================== Md.Israrul Haque .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar & Anr .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Pandey, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Sharda Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER 4 14-05-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State. This case gives a piquant picturisation of the event. At an earlier occasion, Mohania P.S. Case No. 193 of 1999 was registered at the behest of one Suresh Prasad, Forester which ultimately concluded in submission of final form as well as for taking action under [STATUTE] against the informant meanwhile, the informant had taken other legal recourse and on the basis thereof vide order dated 03.12.2001, cognizance was taken under Sections 41,42, 52 of the Indian Forest Act and under Sections 5,12,16 of the Kendu Leaves (Trade and Control, Act 1973). With regard to Forest Case No.107A/1999. The aforesaid matter was taken up by the petitioner under Cr.Misc. No. 23642/2003 and vide order dated 24.11.2005, there has been specific direction for amalgamation of Complaint Case No. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.40340 of 2010 (4) dt.14-05-2012 2 107A/2001 along with Complaint Case No. 963/02 because of the fact that the State had conceded over the point that both the cases happens to be originated for the same occurrence. While the order impugned was kept intact. In the year 2010, after expiry of five years from the date of above referred order, again the petitioner has challenged order dated 03.12.2001 that happens to be non maintainable in the eye of law. Whether order dated 24.11.2005 passed in Cr.Misc. No. 23642/2003 has been complied with or not, the same has not been asserted by the petitioner in his pleadings. However, if the same has not been complied with as yet, the petitioner will be at liberty to place relevant order passed by the Hon’ble Court as referred above and the learned lower court after amalgamation of both the cases so given by the order dated 24.11.2005 passed in Cr.Misc. No.23642/2003 will proceed in accordance with law. With the aforesaid direction, the instant petition is disposed of. perwez./- (Aditya Kumar Trivedi, 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.