IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11643 of 2008 OM PRAKASH SRIVASTAVA Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 02. 30.04.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The present case has been filed for quashing of the order dated 26.06.2006 in Complaint Case No. 1680 of 2005 wherein the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Katihar has taken cognizance under Sections 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the witnesses are being examined at 244 Cr.P.C. level. It is further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that no case under Section 406, 420 is made out since the petitioner was not present at the relevant time at the place where the occurrence is alleged to have been taken place, as much prior to that, vide Annexure-3, the petitioner was transferred and as per the bye-laws only the existing member can participate in the Cooperative of the Bank in question. In view of the change situation, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter. However, petitioner is at liberty to raise all his contentions at the time of 2 framing of charge, if the charges have already not been framed. The application stands dismissed. Shageer (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)