IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.47066 of 2006 BINESH KUMAR @ DINESH KUMAR & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 15.5.2008. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the order dated 12.6.2006 passed in Cr. Revision No. 4 of 2005 by Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Hilsa whereby and whereunder he was pleased to set aside the order dated 24.11.2004 passed by S.D.J.M., Hilsa in Complaint Case No. 11C/2003 and directed the S.D.J.M. to pass a fresh order on the material available on the record. Heard learned counsel for both the parties. It appears that the dispute is with regard to death certificate issued by Gram Panchayat with regard to death of Sahdeo Gope. According to the story of petitioners Sahdeo Gope died on 1.1.1989 and accordingly death certificate was issued on 8.2.2002 whereas according to opposite party no. 2 actually Sahdeo Gope died on 15.5.1992 and the death certificate was obtained by the petitioners on false statement and petition filed in the Panchayat Simiti. First of all, opposite party no. 2 lodged fardbeyan before Hilsa Police Station which registered it as Hilsa P. S. Case No. 204 of 2002 against the petitioners under Sections 420/120(B) I.P.C. The police after investigation submitted final form (Annexure-2). However, in the meantime, opposite party no. 2 filed a protest-cum-complaint petition before the Court of ACJM, Hilsa. - 2 - After acceptance of final form submitted by the police, learned ACJM converted the protest petition as complaint case no. 11C/2003. After enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. learned SDJM dismissed the complaint case under Section 203 Cr.P.C. vide order dated 24.11.2004. However, opposite party no. 2 preferred criminal revision against that very order. Learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Hilsa vide order dated 12.6.2006 allowed the revision and set aside the order passed by learned SDJM and directed to pass a fresh order on the materials available in the complaint case. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that filing of the complaint case is out and out misuse of the process of the Court. A title suit has already been filed by opposite party no. 2 against the petitioners over the land of Sahdeo Gope which is still pending. It has further been submitted that the death certificate is a public document which is prepared after due enquiry and unless it is set aside by the competent court it is deemed to be genuine and correct. Therefore, no criminal case is maintainable. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and perused the impugned order. It is quite apparent that on the basis of allegation levelled in the protest-cum-complaint petition no criminal offence is made out. Police as well as learned SDJM has rightly dismissed the case of opposite party no. 2. Learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge has committed grave error in allowing the revision and directing for further enquiry which is not in consonance with the law. - 3 - Thus, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this application is allowed. Impugned order dated 12.6.2006 passed in Cr. Revision No. 4 of 2005 passed by Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Hilsa is, hereby, quashed. kanchan (Ghanshyam Prasad, J.)