UPENDRA NATH SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Four petitioners, who were at the relevant time Branch Manager, Dy. Branch Manager, Manager Recovery and Manager, P.D.L. in the Bihar State Financial Corporation, Patna , have approached this Court, while invoking its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding in Complaint Case No.C.A.No.603 of 1998 including an order dated 3.11.1998 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Patna City in Complaint Case No.603 of 1998. By order dated 3.11.1998, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offences under Sections 420, 406,120B of the Indian Penal Code

(2.) Short fact of the case is that Opp.Party no.2 claiming to be proprietor of ?Executors and Traders? filed a complaint in the court of Addl.Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna City, which was numbered as Complaint Case No.603 of 1998 against aforesaid four petitioners on an allegation of commission of offences under Section 420, 406 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. It was disclosed in the complaint petition that the complainant was doing business of property developer and also as a middle man for sale and purchase of land in the name and style of ?Executors and Traders?. The complainant was sole proprietor of the said firm. It was disclosed in the complaint petition that a company ,namely, M/S India Machinery Stores (P) Ltd., Kumrahar, Patna ( herein after referred to as ?the Company?) had taken loan of Rs. 16.45 lacs on 31.3.1985 from the Bihar State Financial Corporation ( hereinafter referred to as ? B.S.F.C.?) and up to 28.2.1998, total outstanding along with interest had come to Rs.35,75,232.46. It was disclosed that the Company remained closed for about 10 years and was not in a position to repay the loan amount. The complainant entered into an agreement with the said company. As per terms of the agreement, the complainant took possession of the factory premises, prepared a lay out plan and started looking the intending purchasers. It has been disclosed that the complainant had paid the amount payable to the Company and undertaken to repay the loan of B.S.F.C. and, accordingly, the Managing Director of the Company executed an absolute registered power of Attorney in favour of the complainant. The complainant disclosed that he repaid Rs.28.43 Lacs against Rs.35, 75,232.46 to the B.S.F.C. through Bank Draft/ Bankers Cheque, out of which a sum of Rs. 21,21,000/- was paid up to 8.10.1998 vide Managing Director of the said Company. It was disclosed in the complaint petition that on 17.10.1998, accused persons came to the factory premises and started creating nuisance. The complainant was threatened by accused persons regarding lodging of criminal case against him. It was alleged that accused persons were demanding illegal gratification of Rs.2, 00,000/- . However, the complainant was having only Rs.5000/- in his possession, which was forcibly taken by petitioner no.3. As per complaint petition, the occurrence had taken place on 17.10.1998 and thereafter the complainant went to lodge a police case. Since no case was lodged, the complaint petition was filed in the court of learned Addl.Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna City. After conducting enquiry, the learned Magistrate vide its order dated 3.11.1998 took cognizance of offences under Sections 420, 406 and 120 B of the Indian Penal Code and directed for summoning the petitioners.

(3.) Aggrieved with the order of cognizance, four petitioners approached this Court by filing the present petition. On 5. 4.1999, while issuing notice to Opp.Party no.2, this Court directed that further proceeding in Comlaint Case No.603 of 1998 in the Court below shall remain stayed in the meantime. Subsequently, on 29.4.1999 after hearing both the parties, the petition was admitted for hearing. It was directed that till final disposal of this application interim order passed on 5.4.1999 will continue. The order of stay is still continuing.