C K VAIDYA Vs. NARENDRA CHANDRA KALUA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Debraj Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Golekha Parida, learned Counsel for the opposite party.

(2.) The petitioner C.K. Vaidya has filed this application under section 482 of Cr.P.C. challenging the impugned order dated 20.02006 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar in 1.C.C. No.2815 of 2005 in taking cognizance of the offences under sections 294/355/356/420/467/506/452/34 of the Indian Penal Code and issuance of process against him.

(3.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as per the complaint petition, the occurrence in question took place on 18.06.2003 at Hotel Richi, Station Square, Bhubaneswar and the complaint petition was filed on 31.08.2005. It is further contended that from the side of the petitioner, a complaint petition was filed before the learned J.M.F.C. (A.Q) , Pune which was registered as R.C.C. No.318 of 2003 in which the opposite party-complainant was the accused no.2 and just as a counter blast to such complaint petition, this complaint case was filed before the learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar. It is further contended that the entire allegation is against co-accused persons Saroj Kumar Nanda, Sankar Mitra and Partha Dey who are the accused nos.2, 3 and 4 in the complaint petition and bald allegation has been made that the entire thing has been done at the instance of the petitioner. He further contended that though the case was posted for conducting the inquiry as contemplated under section 202 Cr.P.C., the complainant did not produce any witness and accordingly, the inquiry was closed on 02.2006 and on the next date i.e. on 20.02.2006, the impugned order was passed. It is further contended that the ingredients of offences under which the cognizance has been taken are not attracted so far as the petitioner is concerned and therefore, invoking the power under section 482 Cr.P.C., the same should be quashed.