IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.50530 of 2007 1. Shankar Sah, Son of Late Sona Lal Sah. 2. Pramod Sah, Son of Sri Shankar Sah. 3. Santosh Sah, Son of Sri Shankar Sah. All residentsof Village Karsaiya, P.S. Dhaka, District East Champaran. ------- Petitioners Versus 1. State of Bihar. 2. Shankar Sah, Son of Sona Lal Sah, Resident of Chandrahia, P.S. Motihari Muffasil, District East Champaran. ----------- Opposite Parties ----------- 4 29.03.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The order taking cognizance for offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code is sought to be resisted by the petitioners on the ground that there was only a marriage negotiation, which had failed and, therefore, strictly speaking, the same would not be cheating within the meaning of Section 415 of the Indian Penal Code punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. This Court, however, would find that the said submission of the petitioners cannot be accepted for more than one reason. It is an admitted fact that the negotiation for marriage had taken place and in such negotiation as per the prevalent custom certain gifts were also exchanged. If for any reason such marriage could not be negotiated 2 and finally not performed, it was the duty of the petitioners to return such gift. The court below has noted that in fact a Panchayati for this purpose was held, wherein, the petitioners had accepted the liability of paying Rs. 58,051/- but when the same was also not paid, the criminal case in hand was filed. When this issue was made known to the counsel for the petitioners, he had fairly submitted that the petitioners shall return the amount of Rs. 58,051/- but, it would not be possible for them to return the amount in one lump-sum and therefore, the same should be allowed to be paid in three equal installments each of two months. Learned counsel for the petitioners in fact has assured this Court that in a period of six months, the entire amount of Rs. 58,051/- shall be returned by them to the complainant opposite party no.2. This Court in order to shorten the litigation and in fact for reducing the acrimony between the parties would accept the aforementioned voluntary offer of the learned counsel for the petitioners and would accordingly direct the petitioners to pay a 3 sum of Rs. 58,051/- in three equal installments, the first one whereof would be paid by 15th of April, 2010, the second one by 15th of June, 2010 and the third and last one by 15th of August, 2010. Such payment of each installment will be made by the petitioners through a bank draft in the name of the opposite party no.2, which will be deposited in the court by them on the schedule of dates as indicated above whereafter the same would be handed over by the Court to the opposite party no. 2 within a week. It is made clear that default in payment of any of the three installments by the petitioner would automatically take away the benefit which is going to be extended to the petitioners only after completing the entire payment. Upon payment of Rs. 58,051/- by the petitioners in the manner indicated above, the court below after recording this fact would close the prosecution of the petitioners and drop the proceedings. With the aforementioned observations and direction, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)