IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SLA No.28 of 2009 Mosmat Ram Sakhi Devi @ Ramsakhia Devi, W/o Late Rajendra Prasad, resident of village- Chakchanda, Khusrupur, P.S. Khusrupur, District- Patna. ….Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Krishna Dhanuk, S/o Ram Swarup Dhankuk, 3. Ramchandra Dhanuk, S/o Gopal Dhanuk, 4. Satrughan Dhanuk, S/o Gopal Dhanuk From 2 to 4 resident of Nimtal, Lalimli, Chow Thana, District-Patna …Opposite parties ----------- 2/ 27.04.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. This application has been filed against the judgment dated 09.01.2009 passed by Sri Ram Kishun Prasad Bharti, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patna city, in Complaint Case No.182/1991 /Tr. No.363 of 2007 whereby the opposite party nos. 2to 4 have been acquitted for the offence under sections 420, 468, 471, 472 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The case of the complainant is that she entered into an agreement and purchased a piece of property, which she thought was related to Plot No. 3104 and 3107. However, in the sale deed, the plot numbers, according to the complainant, surreptitiously have been changed and mentioned as 3094 and 3091. The sale deed was registered in the year 1975. It is said that the complainant built a house on plot nos. 3104 and 3107 and she was residing in the house since 1975.Later, opposite parties filed an application under section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure claiming that the complainant was their tenant and had no authority to live in the said house. The court below rejected the prosecution case on two grounds; firstly, on the ground that - 2 - registration of the land took place in the year 1975 and the complaint has been filed in the year 1991 and secondly, on the ground that registered sale deed speaks of plot nos. 3094 and 3091. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the lady has been cheated and she has no other remedy than to file a case of cheating against the opposite parties. In view of the nature of dispute, it can only be settled in a civil suit before the appropriate forum. The criminal court can not take any decision with respect to the claims of the complainant. In that view of the matter, I do not find that the impugned judgment acquitting the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 is biased or unreasonable. In the result, this S.L.A. is dismissed having no merit. JA/- (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)