LAWS(MPH)-2008-3-104

SHARAD AGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Decided On March 24, 2008
PREM AGRAWAL SHRI BABULAL AGRAWAL Appellant
V/S
SHASHI DUBEY, BADRI NATH DUBEY SAXENA SADAN SHANKAR GARH, MAKRONIYA, P.S.CANTT, SAGAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal procedure (for short "the Code"), for quashing the charges of the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 506-B of the IPC. The corresponding trial is pending as Criminal (Complaint) Case no. 171/01 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sagar. In that case, cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 506-B of the IPC was taken against the petitioners upon a charge-sheet submitted by SHO, P. S. Cantt. Sagar after due investigation into the complaint made by the respondent no. 2. However, for the reasons recorded in the order dated 23. 11. 2003, the CJM, Sagar came to the conclusion that there were sufficient grounds for presuming that the petitioners had committed the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 506-B read with Section 34 of the IPC. He, accordingly, proceeded to frame charges of these offences against them.

(2.) BEING aggrieved, the petitioners challenged legality and propriety of the order framing charges inter alia on the ground that the transaction in question gave rise to civil liability only. However, learned IVth ASJ, vide his order-dated 17. 03. 206 passed in Cr. Revison No. 61/06, observing that the charges were justified in the wake of petitioner's refusal to refund the entrusted amount, declined to interfere. The petitioners have not invoked the inherent powers preserved in Section 482 of the Code for quashing the entire proceedings initiated against them on the following grounds :

(3.) A bare perusal of the documents annexed to the petition would reveal that the case against the petitioners as well as coaccused namely R. A. Tiwari and Shiromani, who happened to be Jija (brother-in-law) and sister of the complainant/respondent no. 2 was registered on 20. 12. 2000 after a preliminary enquiry into the allegations made by her in the application submitted before the sho, P. S. Cantt. Sagar on 15. 11. 2000. These allegations may be summarized as under: