ANIL KUMAR GUPTA Vs. SUSHIL KUMAR GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C has been preferred by the petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 23.09.2015 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rewa in Criminal Complaint Case No. 2230/2006, whereby the learned JMFC took the cognizance under Section 420 of IPC against the petitioner.

(2.) According to case, respondent No.1/complainant has filed a private complaint on 08.06.2004, registered as Criminal Case No. 7/05, against the petitioner and respondent No. 2 stating that the respondent No.1, petitioner and one Jitendra are real brother and they are son of Deenanath Gupta. After retirement from Government Service, Deena Nath wanted to settle his sons in business at Rewa for which he got a shop situated at Bus Stand from housing board and has invested money even by taking loan. Thereafter, complainant/respondent has been sent to petitioner for joining the business. Subsequently, an another shop was opened by their father, in it, petitioner and respondent No. 1 was doing joint business. For betterment of the business, their father has provided loan to them and repaid the same by his own salary. Accordingly, two separate loan accounts bearing No. 274 and 275 were opened in their names. However, for the purpose of enabling to prove that the business was his own and not that of the joint family, petitioner fraudulently persuaded Om Prakash Gupta (Respondent No.2), who at the relevant point of time, was posted as the Manager in the Nipaniya Branch of Rewa-Sidhi Gramin Bank. He has converted the loan account of complainant, to the name of petitioner despite knowing the fact that the loan amount was being repaid in installments by their father only. Vide order sheet dated 05.11.05, the learned JMFC took the cognizance of offence of Sections 466 and 468 of IPC against the petitioner and other co-accused person. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner has filed a M.Cr.C before this High Court bearing M.Cr.C No. 1449/2007 in which vide order dated 31.01.2008, Court has allowed the same and quashed the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 07/05 with the liberty to the complainant to move an application 319 Cr.P.C if any occasion arises and directed the trial Court that if the petitioner do so, Magistrate to proceed against the petitioner in respect of other offences if any incriminating material comes before it in the evidence recorded at the subsequent stage of trial.

(3.) The petitioner has moved an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C on 23.09.2013 and by the impugned order, the learned JMFC took the cognizance against the petitioner.