RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, J.:–Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the complainant-opposite party no.2 and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioners, in the present case, are seeking quashing of the order taking cognizance and issuance of summon dated 03.07.2012 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna by which cognizance for the offences under Sections 420, 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken in Complaint Case No. 330(C) of 2012.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed the statement made in the complaint petition, as contained in Annexure-1. The complainant-opposite party no. 2 has alleged that under an agreement to sell dated 22.11.2005, the accused persons who are petitioners in the present case and their mother namely, Devanti Devi, agreed to sell the land bearing plot no. 642, Khata No. 129, Thana 37, Tauzi 5325 in Mauza Abdul Rahmanpur measuring an area of 6 decimals.

4. It is alleged that the accused persons taking the complainant in belief received a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/-, the accused no. 1 signed the agreement to sell showing receipt of advance and promised to execute a registered dee

Click Here to Read the rest of this document