Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.11846 of 2009 ====================================================== 1. Ram Bhajan Singh, son of late Anup Lal Singh, r/o village Bariyarpur, P.S. & Distt. Sitamarhi. 2. Suresh Prasad Singh, son of Biknarayan Singh, r/o village Rajpur, P.S. & Distt. Sitamarhi. 3. Ram Chandra Singh, son of late Jagarnath Singh, r/o village Baduri, P.S. Sahiyara, Distt. Sitamarhi. 4. Surendra Prasad Singh @ Surendra Prasad, son of Bhil Raja Sah, r/o village Sirsia, P.S. Bela, Distt. Sitamarhi. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Kaushal Kishore Singh, I/c. Principal, Dr. Indal Singh Navin, R.K.P.L.D. Kishan College, Bariyarpur, Distt. Sitamarhi. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, Adv. For the State : Mr. Md. Kamran, A.P.P. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Binod Kumar, Adv. Mr. Raghunath Kumar, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL ORDER 8. 24-04-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners seek quashing of the entire proceeding including the order dated 29.4.2008 passed in Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 81 of 2006 by which the Magistrate disagreeing with the final report, has taken cognizance under [STATUTE] . The case of the Informant is that he was legally appointed In-charge Principal of R.K.P.L.D. Kisan College, Bariyarpur, Sitamarhi. When he went to the Bihar Intermediate Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11846 of 2009 (8) dt.24-04-2012 2 / 4 2 Council to collect Admit Cards of students appearing from his College in the Session 2004-06, he learnt that the petitioner No. 1 had given an application authorizing petitioner No. 2 to receive the Admit Cards who further authorized petitioner No. 3 to receive the Admit Cards. However, the Council on looking at the claims of the Informant with regard to his appointment issued him the Admit Cards. The Informant alleged that previously also Ram Bhajan Singh had attempted to harass him and in the year 1987, the District Magistrate had written to the Secretary of the Secondary Education, that Secretary Ram Bhajan Singh was running Kisan College, Bariyarpur, without any building or land and no student had taken examination from the said College. The District Magistrate had held that the real College was R.K.P.L.D. Kisan College. A governing body had been constituted in the College in which the Informant was the In-charge Principal and now in the Chairmanship of the petitioner some office bearers were elected. The Complainant alleged that accused Suresh Prasad Singh who was a Professor in Bilas Prasad Intermediate College, Bairgania, had wrongly represented before the Intermediate Council for issuance of Admit Cards describing the co-accused as office bearers of the College. After investigation, the case ended in a Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11846 of 2009 (8) dt.24-04-2012 3 / 4 3 final report on the ground that the dispute was essentially between two groups of persons claiming to be members of the Governing Body. In fact, the Petitioner No. 1 had also filed Complaint Case No. 1005 of 2006 on 4.9.2006 which was referred to the Police Station under Section 156(3) Cr. P.C. upon which Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 285 of 2006 was instituted. The submission is that in this background, evidently the Complaint is groundless and apart from the fact that the dispute is with regard to the two contesting groups, no offence is disclosed in the First Information Report and, hence, the continuance of the proceeding is bad in law. On the other hand, the counsel for the Complainant submits that the petitioners representing themselves as office bearers of the Governing Body had committed the offence of cheating in representing so. Having heard the rival submissions and gone through the documents annexed herewith, I find that the facts alleged do not constitute any offence whatsoever. Even accepting that Petitioners had wrongly represented as members of the Governing Body even such though a claim had been put to rest, it could not be said that they had committed any Criminal offence. The representation of the nature alleged would, in my opinion come under the exeception enumerated in Section 195 Indian Penal Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11846 of 2009 (8) dt.24-04-2012 4 / 4 4 Code more so, since the Admit Cards were not delivered to them on such representation. In view of such, the application is allowed and the entire proceeding including the order dated 29.4.2008 passed in Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 81 of 2006 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi, is hereby quashed. S.Ali (Anjana Prakash, J.)

Applicable IPC Section: 468

Statute Text:
Section 468 of the Indian Penal Code. Forgery for the purpose of cheating. Whoever commits forgery, intending that the document forged shall be used for the purpose of cheating, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.