IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.4580 of 2008 GOPAL SINGH & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 4/ 30.4.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Some facts are not denied that a sum of rupees one lac seventy thousand was borrowed from the complainant by the accused persons. The complainant says that the borrowing was made by all the accused persons concertedly but what appears from the paragraph 7 of the complaint petition and the document executed in that behalf is that it was petitioner Ram Kishore Singh who had received the money and had executed the receipt on a non-judicial stamp paper. That receipt has been annexed as Annexure A to the counter affidavit. The law is trite that on the facts alleged in the complaint petition or which might be appearing as admitted facts, the order of cognizance has to be tested as regards its correctness in respect of the accused persons who could be summoned by virtue thereof. It is true that there is allegation that all accused persons came on couple of occasions or so to the house of the complainant to borrow the money so as to augmenting their business. But, it remains admitted by virtue of paragraph 7 of the complaint petition that it was Ram Kishore Singh who had received the money and executed the receipt as appears from admitted document, Annexure A. In that background, I find the prosecution of petitioners 2 Gopal Singh and Shikha Singh a complete abuse of the process of the court. Their prosecution is quashed. As regards Ram Kishore Singh, his prosecution shall continue. The petition is allowed in part in the above terms. Anil/ ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)