Disputed documents and questions of fact should be determined by the trial court based on evidence produced in the matter.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. The petitioner invoking inherent jurisdiction of the Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of cognizance order dated 25.04.2012 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda at Biharsharif in G.R. No. 2045 of 2011 arising out of Harnaut P.S.Case NO. 168 of 2011 thereby taking cognizance of offence under Sections 406 and 420 of I.P.C.

3. The brief fact, giving rise to the case, is that Harnaut P.S. Case No. 168 of 2011 dated 20.08.2011 registered under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of I.P.C. was instituted by Parvez Alam, the Block Development Officer, Harnaut, Nalanda, against the petitioner, his predecessor, who was Block Development Officer of the cocnerned Block at the relevant point of time. The FIR was instituted pursuant to direction given by Mr. Jai Singh, I.A.S., the Deputy Development Commissioner, Nalanda, alleging therein that the petitioner, being Block Development Officer, Harnaut, selected list of beneficiaries under the Indira Awas Yojana for the financial year 2011 by violating all the guidelines in the matter and the said wait list did not contain the signature of any of the officials. The police investigated the matter and finding substance in the accusation, submitted charge sheet against the petitioner under Sections 406 and 420 of I.P.C.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner being Block Development Officer, Harnaut, at the relevant point of time, published wait list of the beneficiaries under the Indira Awas Yojana printing hard copy of CD(Compact Disk) containing wait list of such beneficiaries officially communicated to him by the Deputy Development Commissioner, Nalanda vide letter No. 358 dated 02.02.2011. The wait list was in the soft copy in a CD and direction was given to make out a hard copy of it and notify the same and any deviation in compliance would be deemed as violation of the directives and on receiving any complain, after inquiry, responsibilities would be fixed. However, the succeeding Deputy Development Commissioner of the previous one overruled the decision of the predecessor and directed the Block Development Officer to follow new procedure. The petitioner was transferred from Harnaut Block to Akabarpur Block vide notification No. 8232 dated 30.06.2011, even his successor Parwez Alam also selected 419 beneficiaries of Indira Awas Yojana consequently sanction letters were issued in their favours in view of compliance of the earlier directives of the then Deputy Development Commissioner. The beneficiaries were also selected on the basis of wait list contained in CD, however, later on, on 17.08.2011, the Deputy Development Commissioner directed Parwez Alam that the selection was to be made on the basis of family survey list published in the year 2010. Learned counsel also submits that financial benefit by that time had not passed to the selected beneficiaries as by that time money was not transferred into their account. It is also contended that petitioner being Block Development Officer, Harnaut, at the relevant point of time, selected the beneficiaries from the wait list provided by the Deputy Development Commissioner and no role was played by him to prepare the wait list of beneficiaries, only directives of the Deputy Development Commissioner was followed, even his successor also followed that directive and selected beneficiaries.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterates and makes emphasis that as the wait list was prepared as per directives of the Deputy Development Commissioner, so prima facie neither offence of cheating is made out nor the offence of breach of trust.

6. Learned counsel for the State submits that Indira Awas Yojana is a Central Government sponsored scheme and in the year 2011, the beneficiaries were to be selected from the ‘family survey list 2010’, but the petitioner selected the beneficiaries arbitra