Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3870 of 2012 ====================================================== Shakil Ahmad Son Of Late Azimuddin Resident Of Village-Kayamganj, P.S. Makhdumpur, District-Jehanabad .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, Department Of Road And Supply, Government Of Bihar, Patna 2. The Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, Department Of Food And Supply, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Collector, Jehanabad 4. The Sub Divisional Officer, Jehanabad 5. The District Supply Officer, Jehanabad 6. The Block Supply Officer Makhdumpur, District-Jehanabad .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.N. SINHA ORAL ORDER 2 05-09-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner is P.D.S. licensee, whose licence has been cancelled/suspended under Memo No.510 dated 16.07.2008 by the licensing authority i.e. Sub-divisional Officer, Jehanabad on the ground that he has been made accused in Vigilance P.S. Case No.39/2008 dated 3.7.2008 for the offence under [STATUTE] and Sections 7, 8, 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 along with other 53 fair price shop dealers named in the F.I.R. from serial nos.14 to 66. P.D.S. licence of other fair price dealers who were accused in Vigilance P.S. Case No.39/2008 dated 3.7.2008 was also cancelled/suspended by the licensing authority. Madhusudan Sharma, Rambadan Singh and Laxmi Narayan Paswan, fair price shop dealers who were made accused in the said vigilance case and whose Patna High Court CWJC No.3870 of 2012 (2) dt.05-09-2012 2/2 licence was also cancelled/suspended by the licensing authority approached this Court and this Court under orders dated 11.10.2010, 20.9.2011 and 10.1.2012 passed in C.W.J.C. Nos.16648/2010, 14237/2010 and 19229/2010 quashed the order cancelling/suspending their licence. It is submitted that the case of the petitioner is also on the similar footing. Counsel for the State also accepts the aforesaid position. 3. Let petitioner challenge Memo No.510 dated 16.7.2008, Annexure-1 before the Collector, Jehanabad in appeal on the ground that licence of other P.D.S. dealers who were made accused in Vigilance P.S. Case No.39/2008 dated 3.7.2008 has been restored under the directions of the Committe headed by the Collector, Jehanabad, as would appear from Annexure-3 as also rely on the other orders of the High Court dated 11.10.2010, 20.9.2011 and 10.1.2012 passed in C.W.J.C. Nos.16648/2010, 14237/2010 and 19229/2010. Petitioner should file appeal within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the appeal should be considered after condoning the delay as early as possibly, in any case within 60 days from the date of receipt of the memo of appeal annexing a copy of this order. 4. The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Rajesh/- (V.N. Sinha, 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.