IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.18663 of 2006 Niloy Ranjan Chakravorty, son of Sudendu Chakravarty, Proprietor Dream Salution, 160, H.B. Road, Lalpur, Ranchi, Jharkhand – Petitioner. Vs. (1) The State of Bihar, (2) Pankaj Kumar Sinha, Proprietor M/s. Sri Ashutosh Enterprises, C/o Satyendra Singh, Lakhibagh, Anand Market, Gaya – Opp. Parties. … For the petitioner: Mr. Shivendra Kr. Sinha and Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha, Advocates. For the State: Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A.P.P. For opposite party: Mr. Shiv Shankar Sharma, Advocate. 5 22.4.2011 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and the complainant had entered into a contract for carrying out certain works. In the business transaction it is said that the petitioner was to pay a sum of Rs.49,000/- to the complainant. It is also said that the petitioner issued a Cheque of Rs.1 lakh which subsequently bounced. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was no intention to cheat the complainant, rather, the complainant has filed this case because in the business transaction as a security he had offered a Cheque of Rs.1 lakh. Subsequently the dealing between them closed which would be apparent from Annexure 4. These aspects of the matter cannot be taken into account for the purpose of quashing the order of cognizance. However, these aspects of the matter can be raised by the petitioner at the appropriate stage in the case. This application is disposed of with the aforesaid observation. haque ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)