(1.) INVOKING Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure petitioner has moved this Court for quashing of the FIR relating to Bidhan Nagar Police Station Case No. 274 dated December 6, 2012 under Sections 420/406/468/471/506 of the Indian Penal Code relating to G.R. Case No. 1183 of 2012 now pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bidhan Nagar, 24 -Parganas North.
(2.) THE case of the de facto complainant as it transpires from the FIR are as follows:
(3.) FURTHERMORE , it is an admitted position, petitioner's prayer for anticipatory bail has been rejected on February 26, 2013 by a Division Bench of this court in connection with CRM No. 2589 of 2013. The power of police to investigate a case which discloses the commission of cognizable offence is not trammeled by any restriction and in such case unfettered statutory power of the police ought not to be interfered with, by examining the defence of the accused or entering into question of facts. In this case quashing has been sought for on the ground that the dispute between the Bank and the Company of the accused has been settled and the property has been discharged from mortgage therefore, the petitioner's title over the property is no more under dispute. However, according to the allegation, the record of the Housing Society never shows that petitioner had any right, title or interest over the said property. Truth and otherwise of the allegation neither can be gone into at this stage and nor it can be said that this case having a civil flavour is denuded of its criminal outfit. The decision cited before this court relating to the case of Harshendra Kumar D. versus Rebatilata Koley and Others, 2011 3 SCC 351 relates to a case of offence punishable under section 138 of the N.I. Act as no manner of application in the background facts of the case. Where the case against the petitioner was quashed because the aforesaid criminal case was instituted against him even after he resigned from the post of directorship.