IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR.MISC. NO.40986 OF 2007 RAJESH KUMAR SINGH,A213,HIMAT NAGAR,BAZAR NAGAR, JAIPUR. VERSUS 1. STATE OF BIHAR & 2. PARAS NATH CHAUDHARY,NARSANDA,KANTI,MUZAFFARPUR ----------- 4 04.01.2010. The petitioner prays for quashing order dated 22.1.2007,passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur in complaint case no. being trial number 1473 of 2003, whereby cognizance of offence under sections 406,420 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken. Opp party no.2 alleged in the complaint that Bharti Airtel took his premises on lease on the assurance of providing job to the family member which was not provided as assured. The petitioner states that the agreement in question had been made between the Firm and opp party no.2 and he was merely a legal manager of the Firm for some time and even assuming the entire prosecution case to be true, the same would disclose a civil dispute at the most. He further submits that in any view of the matter he was not competent enough for the same. No one appears for the opp party. No one had appeared for opp party even on previous date. I am in agreement with the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that even assuming the allegations to be true, the same would constitute civil case. In that view of the matter, order dated 22.1.2007 taking cognizance of the offence under section 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code in Complaint case no. C 1226/2006, trial no. is set aside. The instant petition thus stands allowed. Shashi. (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J).