M KRISHNA Vs. VIJAY SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The appellant filed a complaint against the respondent alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 193, 196, 197, 406, 465, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. The Magistrate took the cognizance and issued process against the two out of the three accused, named in the complaint. Instead of appearing before the trial Magistrate, the respondents approached the High Court by way of a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "the Code") praying for quashing the proceedings initiated against them. The High Court accepted the prayer of the accused and quashed the proceedings initiated against the respondents mainly on the ground that in view of the pendency of civil disputes between the parties where the genuineness of the documents, relied upon by the complainant, was in dispute, no criminal action could be initiated against the accused persons. Feeling aggrieved by the order of the High Court, the complainant has preferred this appeal contending that the High Court has committed a mistake of law by quashing the proceedings under Section 482 of the Code at the initial stage without affording the complainant an opportunity to prove his case against the accused as detailed in his complaint.

(3.) In his complaint, the appellant had made serious allegations against the respondents and prima facie satisfied the Magistrate about the commission of the offences under various sections of the Indian Penal Code. It was alleged that to prevent legal action against them, the accused persons filed a suit on false and flimsy claim by creating and forging documents/bonds/papers, etc. Those documents were alleged to have been got filled up by the first accused which he had obtained from the complainant on blank papers for production before the Bank as guarantor. The accused were alleged to have betrayed the good faith and confidence reposed in them by the complainant and thus withdrew huge amounts on the basis of the forged documents. Along with the complaint the appellant filed a number of documents and got the statements recorded. After perusal of the complaint, the sworn statements of the complainant, his witness and inspecting the documents produced along with the complaint, the Trial Magistrate, vide his detailed order dated 3-8-1998 (Annexure P-7) directed the registration of the case against the accused Nos. 1 and 2 for offences punishable under Sections 193, 209, 406, 468 and 471 IPC read with Section 120B IPC and issued process against them.