SUNAHARI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

(2.) The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 239/IX? of 2009, (Mahesh Chandra v. Thakur Bharat Singh and others), under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Baldev, District Mathura, pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, District Mathura.

(3.) It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the opposite party no.2 is the police constable in U.P., Police who had given contract for construction of his house to the contractor and did not pay the amount due to him. It is further contended that the applicant is a labour who had worked with the contractor and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is next argued that the matter is with regard to payment of the amount under the contract to the contractor by the opposite party no.2, which has been dragged into criminal prosecution of the applicant at the behest of the opposite party no.2. It is lastly contended that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.