SATYA NARAYAN MOHAPATRA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order dated 19-6-1999 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bhubaneswar in I.C.C. No. 209 of 1997 framing charge under Section 420, I.P.C. against the petitioner is impugned in this case.

(2.) Opp. Party No. 2 filed a complaint petition alleging therein that it was a Dealer and Stockist of Sakura Watch having its Office-cum-Godown at Bhubaneswar. It deals with wrist-watches and supplies the same as per the requirements of other subdealers and retailers of different parts of Orissa. The petitioner being impressed by the quality and designs of Sakura watches placed orders with the complainant for several times and the usual mode of business was on the credit basis subject to repayment either through cheque or cash. The business between the complainant and accused sarted from 1995.

(3.) On 5-10-1996, the petitionerhanded over a cheque drawn on Puri Urban Co-operative Bank, Puri for a sum of Rs. 12,942.75 paise towards the partial credit amount. The said cheque was returned with an endorsement that the signature of the petitioner appearing on the cheque differed. The complainant made bona fide and sincere inquiry about the whereabouts of the petitioner, but could not trace him out. The complainant felt cheated and was constrained to file the complaint petition. The said complaint petition was registered as ICC No. 209 of 1997 in the Court of the learned J.M.F.C., Bhubaneswar and cognizance of offence under Section 420, I.P.C. was taken. The petitioner appeared in Court and in spite of his protest that none of the ingredients of Section 420, I.P.C. was constituted, the Court below framed charge under Section 420, I.P.C. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has approached this Court.