IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR.MISC. NO.23345 OF 2009 JITENDRA KUMAR @ NIPPU, SON OF RAMJI PRASAD, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA ASHOK NAGAR, ROAD NO. 4, POST OFFICE LOHIYANAGAR, POLICE STATION KANKARBAGH, DISTRICT PATNA VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. RAKESH KUMAR, SON OF SHRI GOPAL SARAN SINGH, HOUSE NO. 115, ROAD NO. 01, CHITRAGUPTA NAGAR, POLICE STATION PATRAKAR NAGAR, DISTRICT PATNA ……………………………………………………….OPPOSITE PARTIES ******** 2 18/08/2009 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that even according to paragraph 6, 7 and 9 of the complaint petition, only cheques nos. 367403 and 367404 dated 27.03.2005 and 27.04.2005 have been dishonored. It is submitted that the order taking cognizance is not clear and it appears that all the eight cheques have been dishonored. Learned Counsel further submits that the Court below while hearing the bail application of the petitioner had directed the petitioner to make payment to the complainant on a monthly basis. It is submitted that the petitioner has paid Rs. 76,000/- to the complainant although he was liable for payment of Rs. 45,000/- only. This aspect of the matter will be considered by the Court below at the appropriate 2 stage. As far as the order taking cognizance is concerned, I find that there is no discrepancy or disparity in the impugned order. Accordingly, this application is disposed of. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J. )