IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.45974 of 2009 RAVINDRA KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 20.7.2010 Heard Shri Baxi S.R.P.Sinha, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, Shri S.A. Hussain, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as also Shri Dashrath Mehta, learned A.P.P. for the State. After having gone through the complaint petition which is the basis for investigating into the allegation and, specially, its paragraph 6 onwards, it could not be said that no offence was made out. However, the grievance of the petitioner is that the cognizance taking Magistrate, i.e., the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram has wrongly taken cognizance of the offences under Sections 406, and 420,of the Indian Penal Code. It is hardly required to be pointed out that insertion of a wrong section may not make an order of summoning bad. Besides, the petitioner could place his grievance before the trial court which 2 could be hearing the case, i.e., Sasaram(Model) P.S.Case No. 458 of 2010( G.R. No.1410 of 2009) so that the grievance is looked into and proper order is passed by the learned Magistrate at the time of framing of charges against the accused persons after applying his judicial mind to the facts of the case. With the above observations, the petition is dismissed as of no merit. Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)