Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45315 of 2009 (8) dt.10-10-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.45315 of 2009 ====================================================== 1. Parmanand Prasad S/O Late Bandhu Mahto R/O Vill.- Telhara, P.S.- Telhara, Distt.- Nalanda, Presently Posted As Panchayat Sewak, Narayanpur Gram Panchayat Under Tharthari Block, P.S.- Tharthari, Distt.- Nalanda .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Sheshnath Singh ( Circle Officer ), Tharthari S/O Not Known Block Tharthari, P.S.- Chandi, Distt.- Nalanda .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 8 10-10-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the point of admission and with consent of both the parties, this Court proceeds to decide the matter finally on admission stage itself. Petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 30.07.2008 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hilsa, Nalanda in Chandi P.S. Case No. 04 of 2008 by which and whereunder he took cognizance for the offences punishable under [STATUTE] . At the very outset, it is pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner that some political activists filed a Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45315 of 2009 (8) dt.10-10-2012 petition before the Hon’ble Chief Minister, Bihar in respect of irregularities committed by the petitioner and co-accused in distribution of flood relief to the beneficiaries and, thereafter, a team consisting of Block Extension Officer and other officials made enquiry and after that first information report was lodged and Chandi P.S. Case No. 04 of 2008 under [STATUTE] was registered against the petitioner who happens to be Panchayat secretary and one Bakhori Prasad, the then Mukhiya. It is further contended by him that this false case has been lodged at the behest of political rivals of Bakhori Prasad and as a matter of fact, when the political opponents of the aforesaid Bakhori Prasad lost election, they set up the officials and got instituted this false case. It is further contended by him that a very meagre amount of Rs. 2143/- is said to have been embezzled by the petitioner and aforesaid co- accused, Bakhori Prasad. It is further contended by him that prior to filing of this petition, petitioner and co-accused Bakhori Prasad filed Cr.W.J.C. No. 175 of 2008 and the aforesaid Cr.W.J.C. No. 175 of 2008 was disposed of by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.01.2009 giving liberty to petitioner and co-accused Bakhori Prasad to bring all the relevant facts before the investigating agency in respect of bias but before passing the Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45315 of 2009 (8) dt.10-10-2012 aforesaid order dated 12.01.2009 the investigating officer had already submitted charge sheet and petitioner could not get opportunity to make representation before the investigating agency. It is further contended by him that as a matter of fact, there is nothing against the petitioner but in spite of that petitioner and co-accused Bakhori Prasad have been charge sheeted in this case and the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate without applying his judicial mind took the cognizance of the offences passing impugned order. No doubt, petitioner and co-accused, Bakhori Prasad were granted opportunity by another Bench of this Court to raise the plea of bias before the investigating agency but admittedly, before passing the aforesaid order, the charge sheet had already been submitted and, therefore, the order dated 12.01.2009 passed in Cr.W.J.C. No. 175 of 2008 had already become inoperative. So far as no availability of material against the petitioner is concerned, the petitioner may raise the aforesaid plea before the trial court at appropriate stage. On the basis of aforesaid discussions, this petition stands dismissed on admission stage itself. However, petitioner may raise his pleas before the trial court at appropriate stage and if he does so, the learned trial Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45315 of 2009 (8) dt.10-10-2012 court shall pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this Order. SHAHZAD/- (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, 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.