STANLY VARGHESE Vs. MOHAMMED HANEEF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (1) At what stage, the court of a Magistrate is taking cognizance of the offences in a private complaint

(2.) The petitioner and the respondents were doing business in Sharjah. It is alleged that, while in Sharjah, the respondents had induced the petitioner to part with UAE Dirhams equivalent to 35 lakhs of Indian money to the respondents on 13.11.2013 at the residence of the respondents at Sharjah, by promising the reconstitution of a partnership deed and the induction of the petitioner also as partner in the business of that firm. After taking away the money, nothing was heard about it from the respondents. When the petitioner approached the respondents, the 1st respondent handed over a cheque for an amount of 1,60,000 UAE Dirhams in favour of the petitioner drawn on Sharjah Main Branch of the ADC Bank. The said cheque, on presentation, returned dishonoured for insufficiency of funds. According to the petitioner, even through the original transaction, he was deliberately cheated and defrauded and hence, the complaint.

(3.) Petitioner filed the private complainant as CMP No.4829/2015 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Ottappalam alleging offences punishable under Sections 417 and 420 IPC, against respondents 1 and 2 as accused. It is true that the relief sought for in the complaint before the court below was for forwarding the complaint for investigation to the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. At the same time, specific allegations have been raised by the petitioner in the complaint and it is discernible from the complaint that there are specific allegations constituting the offences alleged.