IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.2232 of 2008 GURMIT SINGH DHINGRA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 7 30.4.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the State. Despite valid service of notice, no one appears on behalf of Opposite party no.2, who is the complainant in this case. The petitioners seeks quashing of the order dated 11.10.2002 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patna in Complaint Case No.2070(C) of 2002 by which he has taken cognizance of offence under sections 409, 420 read with section 120B of the Penal Code against the petitioner. It is alleged by the Opposite party no.2 that he had invested a sum of Rs.6,000/- for 6 non-convertible debenture of the company, accused no.1, on the assurance that after 18 months he will get matured value of amount of Rs.11,997/-. After maturity the Opposite party no.2 surrendered the certificates of the company but the company did not pay him the maturity amount. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid maturity amount has already been received by the complainant vide Demand Draft No.208625 dated 23.2.2003 and in token whereof he has granted receipt to the petitioner on 28.2.2003 as would be evident from Annexure-2. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this court is of the view that continuance of prosecution against the 2 KHAN petitioner would serve no useful purpose and as such the impugned order taking cognizance dated 11.10.2002 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Patna in Complaint Case No.2070(C) of 2002 is set aside. In the result, this application is allowed. (S.P.Singh,J)