JUDGMENT : (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) : Heard the parties. 2. Though notice has validly been served upon the opposite party No.2 yet no one turns up on behalf of the opposite party No.2 in spite of repeated calls. 3. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. of Nawadih P.S. Case No.50 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. No.805 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 420, 467, 468 of the Indian Penal Code, which is pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat. 4. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner No.1 is the husband of the informant and petitioner Nos.2 to 5 are the relatives of the petitioner No.1 and the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners have treated the informant with cruelty in connection with demand of dowry of Rs.2,00,000/- and a fridge and treated her with cruelty for not brining the said dowry. It is further alleged that the petitioners, by way of cheating, took the informant to the premises of Civil Court, Giridih and created false documents purported to be an affidavit which was produced as Sulahnama (deed of compromise) by the petitioner No.1 in Original Suit No.111 of 2022 in the Family Court, Giridih and snatched away the son of the informant and has not yet restored his custody to the informant. There is further allegation that the petitioners came to the house of the informant in a Scorpio vehicle without having any registration number plate, abused and assaulted her and criminally intimidated the informant to kill her unless she goes to the court and gives divorce to the petitioner. The informant went to the police station but no action was taken by the police, hence, the complainant/informant filed Complaint Case No.481 of 2022 and upon the same being referred to police under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C., the F.I.R. of this case was registered and police took up investigation of the case which was going on at present. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is false and the documents alleged to be forged are not forged documents rather they were genuine documents which were prepared by the informant herself. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is false and the documents alleged to be forged are not forged documents rather they were genuine documents which were prepared by the informant herself. Learned counsel for the petitioners relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Others v. State of Bihar & Others reported in (2022) 6 SCC 599 and submits that the allegations made against the petitioners are false and the same are general and omnibus in nature and do not warrant prosecution. It is further submitted that the petitioner No.1 filed Original Suit No.111 of 2022 for divorce while the complainant/informant filed Original Suit No.245 of 2022 against the petitioners for obtaining the custody of her son and suppressing the material facts above, the complaint was filed which upon being referred to police under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C., the said F.I.R. has been registered. Hence, it is submitted that the F.I.R. of Nawadih P.S. Case No.50 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. No.805 of 2022, which is pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat, be quashed and set aside. 6. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for quashing the F.I.R. of Nawadih P.S. Case No.50 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. No.805 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 420, 467, 468 of the Indian Penal Code, which is pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat and submits that this is not a case involving the offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code or the provisions of Dowry Prohibition Act, simpliciter as was in the case of Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Others v. State of Bihar & Others (supra) rather in this case, serious charges of forgery for the purpose of cheating as well as cheating is involved and there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioners of having committed forgery. It is then submitted that; it is not even the case of the petitioners that even if the allegations made against the petitioners are treated to be true still no offence is made out against them nor the petitioners could establish any ground as mentioned by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in paragraph-102 of the case of State of Haryana & Others vs Bhajan Lal & Others reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335. Hence, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed. 7. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, this Court finds that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioners of having committed the offence of cheating by inducing the complainant-informant to go to the premises of Civil Court, Giridih and having cheated her by taking her son and having got four false documents prepared. As has rightly been submitted by the learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State that the allegations made in the complaint is not regarding the offence of cruelty or demand of dowry only as was in the case of Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Others v. State of Bihar & Others (supra) rather the allegations made against the petitioners are of serious nature. It is a settled principle of law that the High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. ought not stifle a legitimate prosecution as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Monica Kumar (Dr.) & Another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Others reported in (2008) 8 SCC 781 . 8. 8. Now, coming to the facts of the case, this Court is of the considered view that it cannot be said that if the allegations against the petitioners as made out in the complaint which upon being referred to police under Section 156 (3), the F.I.R. of this case has been registered, would not make out any case for cognizable offence even if the allegations against the petitioners are treated to be true in its entirety and in the absence of the same, certainly this is not a fit case where the F.I.R. of Nawadih P.S. Case No.50 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. No.805 of 2022 which is pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat, be quashed and set aside. 9. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioners to quash and set aside the F.I.R. of Nawadih P.S. Case No.50 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. No.805 of 2022 which is pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat, stands rejected. 10. So far as the contention of the petitioners that the allegations against them are false, is concerned, certainly the same is the defence of the petitioners which they can take during the trial of the case but certainly the same is not a sufficient ground to quash the F.I.R. of Nawadih P.S. Case No.50 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. No.805 of 2022 which is pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat by holding a mini trial. 11. Accordingly, this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, stands rejected. 12. In view of disposal of the instant Cr.M.P., interim relief granted to the petitioners vide order dated 01.12.2022 stands vacated. 13. Registry is directed to intimate the court concerned forthwith.