RAMESH CH PATRA Vs. PRABIR KUMAR SATPATHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the present application the petitioner has sought for quashing the order of the learned Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Sadar, Berhampur in I.C.C. No. 18 of 1996 taking cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 420/294/506 I.P.C. and issuing process against him.

(2.) THE opp. party complainant in the Court below filed I.C.C, No. 18 of 1996 against the petitioner alleging therein that the petitioner who is a journalist, working in the Indian Express and the cpmplainant, a practising advocate of Berhampur Bar, were friends since about last twenty years. The accused petitioner having approached the complainant and induced him to purchase a house site belonging to him at Gajapatinagar, Berhampur, he (complainant) believing him, advanced a sum of Rs. 25,000/ on 9.2.93 in presence of witnesses out of an agreed consideration of Rs. 50,000 for the said plot of land. Subsequently the complainant arranged the balance amount and approached the accused for executing the sale deed but the accused postponed the same on some pretext or the other and avoided to execute the sale deed. The complainant made an enquiry and came to know that the accused does not have any house site at Gajapatinagar to sell and, therefore, he asked the accused to return the advance amount of Rs. 25,000/ but the accused instead of returning the amount, threatened him with dire consequences. It is alleged that the accused fraudulently induced the complainant to part with Rs. 25,000/ and retained the same whereas he has no plot to sell and cheated the complainant. When the matter stood thus, on 20.1.96 at about 12.30 p.m. while the complainant was going to court, the accused obstructed the complainant in front of the Tahsil Office and abused him in filthy language, removed a knife and wanted to stab the stomach of the complainant but due to timely intervention of the witnesses, the life of the complainant was saved and he ran away. It is further alleged that the matter was reported to the Officer in charge, Baidyanathpur Police Station on the same day and the police by siding the accused, did not take any action and finally on 12.2.96, refused to take any action against the accused and instructed the complainant to go to court and hence the complaint is said to have been filed.

(3.) ON the basis of the aforesaid complaint and the statement of the complainant recorded under Section 200, Cr.P.C., the learned S.D.J.M. found a prima facie evidence regarding commission of the offence under Sections 420/294/506 I.P.C. and took cognizance of the said offences and directed issuance of summons.