IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.645 of 2010 CHANDRAMA SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR 3. 13.08.2010 The petitioners seek quashing of the order dated 17.9.2009 by which Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Rohtas, Sasaram has taken cognizance under Section 323,341 and 379 of the I.P.C. in Complaint Case No. 27/09 Tr. No. 2597/09. On the last occasion notices were issued to the opposite party no. 2, who has appeared before the court and the parties make their rival contentions. The case of the complainant is that despite friendship between the two a financial dispute had arisen and therefore, the accused were liable for prosecution under Section 406, 379, 341, 323 I.P.C. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in fact the complainant had borrowed some money from the petitioners and when asked to return the same, he gave a cheque which bounced and therefore, he instituted a complaint against him on 11.11.2008 and thereafter the present complaint was instituted on 6.1.2009. The learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has - 2 - contended that in the facts of the case offence under Section 323,341 and 379 is made out and therefore the prosecution should not be quashed. In my view when it is bought to the notice of this court that in fact evidently the complaint has been filed as a back lash, I am duty bound to protect the persons who are wrongly prosecuted. In view of such, this application is allowed and the order dated 17.9.2009 by which Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Rohtas, Sasaram has taken cognizance under Section 323,341 and 379 of the I.P.C. in Complaint Case No. 27/09 Tr. No. 2597/09 stand quashed. Fahad. ( Anjana Prakash, J. )