BAL KISHAN JAIN Vs. INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHETHER Sections 398 and 399 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 1973. envisage within their ambit a direction to the trial Magistrate to summon the persons accused before him or if already so summoned to frame a charge against them and put them on trial is the significant question which has necessitated this reference to the Division Bench.

(2.) THE facts relevant to the controversy are not in serious dispute. The Indian Overseas Bank, respondent No. 1, and its Branch Manager Shri J. R. Tutlari had Jointly preferred a complaint under Sections 406, 420/34 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code alleging that the four petitioners, namely, Bal Kishan Jain; Smt. Prem Lata Jain; Prem Nath and Hem Chand Jain had dishonestly misappropriated the goods hypothecated with the respondent-Bank under an agreement and had thereby intentionally cheated them. It was further alleged that the offence had been committed in concert and in conspiracy, with Sat Pal, Kewal Krishan, Mohinder Kumar, Salaish Gupta and Rakesh Gupta, who were also arrayed as accused persons in the complaint.

(3.) THE learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtak, before whom the matter came up in the first instance after re-cording the preliminary evidence produced on behalf of the complainants dismissed the complaint under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the finding that the case was one of a purely civil nature and the complaint appeared to be an attempt to press in aid the machinery of criminal law for pressurising the petitioners to pay the amount.