Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.11536 of 2010 ====================================================== Dhirendra Pratap Singh Son of Patwari Singh, R/O village Patibharapur, P.S. Patherwa, District-Kushi Nagar (U.P) .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Dr. Ashish Ranjan S/o Dr. Brajendra Singh r/o Sareya Road Ward no. 4, Kali Asthan P.S. & Dist- Gopalganj .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 4 10-07-2012 Heard Sri Naresh Dikshit, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Anuj Kumar Srivastava, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor as well as Sri Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary, learned counsel, who was appeared on behalf of Opp. Party No. 2. The petitioner, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has prayed for quashing of an order dated 17.02.2010 passed by Sri Bipin Kumar, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Gopalganj, in G.R. No. 2193 of 2009/Trial No. 3504 of 2010, arising out of Gopalganj P.S. Case No. 196 of 2009. By the said order, learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offence under [STATUTE] . Learned counsel for the petitioner, while assailing the order, has argued that on perusal of F.I.R., it appears that no Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.11536 of 2010 (4) dt.10-07-2012 2 / 2 2 offence is made out against the petitioner. He further submits that the complainant himself admits in the complaint petition that the petitioner is his relative and in that relation, he has taken amount from the complainant for constructing building. His (petitioner) intention was not to cheat the complainant/Opp. Party No. 2. In this case, after registering the F.I.R., police submitted charge-sheet. Thereafter, learned Magistrate, by the impugned order, has passed order of cognizance. Prima facie, after perusing the F.I.R., the court is satisfied that the case is made out against the petitioner, for which cognizance order has been passed. I do not find any defect in the order. Petition stands dismissed. Anay/- (Rakesh Kumar, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 420

Statute Text:
Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Cheating and there by dishonestly inducing delivery of property, or the making, alteration or destruction of a valuable security. Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.