IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.18971 of 2000 BIKRAMA CHAUDHARY Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR with Cr.Misc. No.998 of 2001 RAM JATAN CHAUDHARY & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- For the Petitioners: Shri Dhananjay Kumar, Advocate For the State : Shri Dashrath Mehta, APP ----------- 4/ 18.8.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. As regards the cognizance and summoning order, the court is clear in its mind that offence under section 420 of the IPC or those relating to forging a document or creating a false document could not have been taken cognizance of by the learned magistrate. However, the case shall have to proceed for the offence for cutting the trees and carrying them away, which were never conveyed through the deed in question to the petitioners. To that extent, the prosecution of the petitioners shall lie and be continued. With the above observations, the two petitions are dismissed. However, if the parties compromise and the court is satisfied about it, it may attempt to conclude the trial within a time which could be fixed by it at the earliest. Anil/ ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)