RAM NATH PODDAR Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are the two revisional applications bearing Nos. C. R. R. 521 of 1995 and 2424 of 1996 under Sections 401 and 482, Cr. P. C. filed by the petitioners. In C. R. R. 521 of 1995 the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the proceedings being G. R. Case No. 834 of 1994 corresponding to Bally p. S. Case No. 89 dated 20. 4. 1994 pending before the learned Sub-Divisional judicial Magistrate, Howrah and the impugned order dated 13. 02. 95 whereby and whereunder the learned Magistrate was pleased to pass an order not accepting the final report and directing the Special Superintendent, C. I. D. , west Bengal to take up further investigation by an experienced officer of the department. In the C. R. R. No. 2424 of 1996 the petitioners have prayed for quashing/setting aside the order dated 19. 6. 1996 and 25. 7. 1996 passed in the said G. R. Case by learned S. D. J. M. , Howrah and quashing the charge sheet submitted on 25. 7. 1996 in the aforesaid G. R. Case.

(2.) THE petition of complaint was filed before the Court of learned sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate at Howrah alleging that the complainant is a business man and permanent resident of Jharia, Bihar and temporarily residing at Belur, Howrah. The accused persons are the brokers in share market at Calcutta and run a firm under the name and style M/s. Ramnath poddar and Co. , 135a, Biplabi Rash Behari Basu Road, Calcuta - 700 001. The accused No. 1 is the proprietor of the said firm and accused Nos. 2 and 3 are the sons of accused No. 1. In the month of June, 1991 the accused No. 1 came to the house of the complainant at Howrah and introduced himself as the share broker. After enquiry the Complainant started transaction with accused No. 1 in the month of August, 1991 and sold some shares to him. After a few days the accused No. 1 gave him money after deducting the brokerage charge and in this way there was transaction of selling and purchasing of shares for about one year without any interruption and/or dispute. From 02. 7. 1993 to 22. 7. 1993 the complainant sold huge shares of various reputed companies to the accused persons in presence of witness nos. 2, 3 and 4 totalling to Rs. 92,400/- and had purchased some shares amounting to Rs. 9,825/ -. After adjusting the said amount, Rs. 82,575/-only was due to be paid by the accused to the complainant. The complainant visited the office of the accused several times, but, they refused to pay on some pretext or other and finally the accused No. 1 wrote a letter dated 19. 8. 1992 to one Shri Gobind Gutgutia of Dhanbad requesting him to make payment of the sum of Rs. 82,575/- to the complainant. The complainant along with witness No. 4 met Shri Gutgutia, but, he refused to make payment. After returning from Dhanbad, the complainant went to the office of accused persons and demanded his dues. At this stage, the accused No. 1 issued three different cheques amounting to Rs. 47,575/- to the complainant. As such, the sum of Rs. 35,000/- still remained due to be paid by the accused to the complainant. Under the circumstances, the complainant filed a complaint before the Court of the learned Magistrate under Sections 420/ 406/120b/506, I. P. C. and it was sent to the P. S. under Section 156 (3), cr. P. C.

(3.) AFTER investigation of the case, the police submitted final report and the complainant filed a Narazi petition. The learned Magistrate on hearing the said Narazi petition passed the impugned order on 13. 2. 1995 whereby the final report was not accepted and Special Superintendent, c. I. D. , West Bengal was directed to take up further investigation by an experienced officer of the department. Being aggrieved by the said order, the accused persons preferred Criminal Revision No. 521 of 1995 challenging the said order dated 13. 02. 1995 and for quashing of the proceeding.