IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.839 of 2007 KUNJ BIHARI LAL, SON OF SHRI CHITRANJAN LAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-SONBARSA, P.S.- SAHPUR, DISTRICT BHOJPUR, BIHAR. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. DHANRAWATI KUER, WIFE OF LATE LAXMAN SAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-MASADH, P.S.- UDWANTNAGAR, DISTRICT- BHOJPUR, BIHAR For the petitioner : Mr. Satyabir Bharti, Advocate. For the O.P. : Mr. Ram Chandra Singh, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Nityanand Tiwary, A.P.P. ----------- 5 22.06.2010 Heard both sides. Petitioner, who is facing prosecution under diverse sections of the Indian Penal Code including Sections 420 and 468 IPC, assails the order dated 12.4.2007 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Ara in Complaint Case no. 648C of 1998 whereby the application seeking discharge filed under Section 245 of the Cr.P.C. has been considered and rejected. A complaint was lodged by opposite party no. 2 alleging therein that on 14.3.1994, one co-accused (Ram Pujan Rai) and the petitioner herein approached her and represented that they had 14 kathas of land which the accused no. 1 wanted to dispose of. As the complainant was interested in purchase of a piece of land, negotiation was made and the consideration amount was fixed at Rs. 38,000/-. Petitioner herein ascribed the deed relating to the said sale sometimes in 1994. The original deed was, however, not made available to her. Subsequently, in 1998, it was found that the land in question did not stand in the name of the vendor (accused Ram Pujan Rai). 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner, while assailing the impugned order, states that there is absolutely no legal evidence available on record. He refers to the statement of the complainant recorded before the charge (Annexure-2). This Court finds from the statement recorded by the learned Trial Court before charge (Annexure-2 and 3) that there is/are allegation that the petitioner along with the seller had visited the house of the complainant in order to convince her that the land, in fact, belong to the vendor who was also in possession thereof. Learned Trial Court, in the impugned order, on perusal of the entire material on record has recorded a finding that there is sufficient material available on record which justify the trial of the petitioner. This Court finds no merit in the application. It is accordingly dismissed. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )