IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.5042 of 2009 SIPAHI PRASAD @ SIPAHI BHAGAT & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 4. 6.12.2010 Heard. This Criminal Miscellaneous application has been filed for quashing of order dated 7.9.2007 by which cognizance has been taken by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan in Barharia for the offences under Sections 419, 420, 423, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474 and 120B/34 of Indian Penal Code in Barharia P.S. case No. 133 of 2006 (Tr. No. 3506 of 2007). The allegation in the complaint that the accused no. 3 have filed complaint being complaint case no. 449/2006, with false allegation against the husband of the complainant and witnesses, for offences under section 379 I.P.C. on 30.3.2006 and has filed forged and fabricated deed of gift. It is further alleged that on 21.7.2006 accused 1 to 5 of complaint with some anti-social elements and conspire to grab the land of complainant on the basis of forged sale deed and where witness no. 1 was going there she was apprehended, abused and threatened to kill. On the complaint it is alleged that the said deed of gift executed by Grahan Mahto on 23.12.1994 in favour of the accused person which is forged and fabricated and is alleged on the basis of such forged document obstructing document the culprits. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the allegation in the complaint is too vague and there no mention how the deed of gift is forged and fabricated. It has further been 2 contended that allegation whatsoever made in the entire complaint taken to be true on face value does not make out an offence. The allegation is only vague and omnibus that the document is forged and fabricated. However, no one appears even on after noticing on behalf of the complainant. The learned counsel for the State however, submits that though there is no detail about the forgery or conspiracy as to what is false allegation. However, taking into allegation made in complaint is concern there is mere reproducing the section which will not be of any help to prosecution. There is neither any act of commission or omission alleged against accused on the basis it can be inferred that the act committed makes out an offence. This view find support from decision reported in 2009 (4) PLJR 682. Hence, having regard to the fact that since allegations is that there is forgery but no act or commission or omission has been given to. Hence, having regard to the facts that the allegation made in the complaints are quite vague and omnibus without any statement of fact to make out an offence and hence all these facts on the basis the cognizance has been taken mechanically without due application of mind is absolutely an abuse of the process of the Court and hence the order taking cognizance and the criminal proceeding is hereby quashed has no offence is made out. Amit ( Gopal Prasad, J.) 3