MD HASIB Vs. IMAMUDDIN HAJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule is directed against the order dated August 29, 1980 passed by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta in Case No. C/1918 of 1980, under sections 380/341/504/506 I.P.C. discharging the accused opposite parties Nos. 1 to 3.

(2.) The complainant petitioner filed a petition on 23.7.80 before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta alleging that since 1977 the petitioner was running a betel shop at 29/A, Chandni Chowk Street, Calcutta and took the said shop by executing a deed of agreement along with his brother-in-law S. A. Wahid on November 25, 1979 and the said Wahid had taken the shop from Md. Osman. The petitioner and his younger brother had been running the shop and had the licence in petitioners name. The petitioner left for Patna to appear before the Bihar Public Service Commission and his younger brother was looking after the business. On 3.5.80 the petitionerTs younger brother also went to Patna for his treatment and he kept the key of the shop with the servant Sharfu. In the meantime the accused opposite party No. 1 snatched away the key from the possession of the servant. The petitioner returned on 18.6.80 and he came to know of the fact. The accused persons refused to hand over the key to the petitioner in spite of demand. The accused persons abused the petitioner in filthy language and threatened him with dire consequences if any attempted was made to open the shop. The petitioner filed a written complaint against the accused persons and lodged a general diary at the thana on 19.6.80. On 20.6.80 the petitioner complained before the Assistant Commissioner, Central Division and on his direction K. D. Tewari and Ramchandra Singh went to the post but no action was taken against the accused. The petitioner made several attempted but when no legal action was taken against the accused persons the petitioner went to the Police Commissioner, Calcutta and lodged a written complaint. The petitioner also prayed that the learned Magistrate would be pleased to direct the Deputy Commissioner, Detective Department, Lal Bazar to take cognizance under section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code).

(3.) On receipt of the complaint, the learned Magistrate perused the same and sent the petition to the Deputy Commissioner, Detective Department for causing investigation to be made under section 156(3) of the Code fixing 10.9.80 for report. In the meantime on 4.8.80 the accused opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 made a prayer before the learned Chief Judge, City Sessions Court Calcutta for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code in the event of their arrest in connection with Case No. C/1918/80.