HARI LAL HAZARA @ HIRA LAL HAZARA S/O LATE BIGAN HAZARA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND ANWAT PATEL SON OF LATE RAGHUNI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole petitioner, who was at the relevant time posted as Block Development Officer,Sikta, West Champaran,while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has prayed for quashing of an order dated 10.5.2000 passed by Shri A.K.Gupta, Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah in Complaint Case No. 1647-C/1998, Trial No. 1031 of 2000. By the said order, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offences under Sections 419, 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Short fact of the case is that Opp.Party No. 2 on 5.1.1999 filed a complaint vide Complaint Case No. 1647C of 1998 in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah , West Champaran, disclosing therein that the complainant was well acquainted with the nephew ( Bhagina - Sister's son) of the present petitioner. It was alleged that the nephew of the present petitioner took the complainant to the petitioner with an assurance that a loan for purchasing of "Horse and Tanga" under the government scheme will be provided to the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant himself went to the house of the petitioner along with the nephew of petitioner, where on several papers L.T.I. of complainant was obtained. Subsequently, as alleged, the complainant got a notice from the office of the D.D.C., Bettiah and thereafter, he came to know that a construction work of a room in Dhankutawa Middle School under Scheme of M.P. Development was going on in the name of the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant with the said notice contacted the petitioner, where his accused nephew was also present. The complainant protested and wanted to know that under what circumstances the execution of the said scheme was going on in the name of the complainant, whereas he was assured for providing loan for "Tanga and Horse". It was alleged that subsequently the petitioner was transferred from Sikta and accused No. 2, his nephew also left Sikta place along with the petitioner. It was further disclosed that in the year 1998 the complainant received on Memo No. 560 dated 23.11.1998 from the office of the D.D.C., Bettiah, whereby it was intimated that under the scheme the estimated cost for construction of a room in Dhankutawa Middle School was Rs. 80, 000/-, out of which an amount of Rs. 76, 000/- was given to the complainant as advance till 2.1.1997. However, as per the Measurement Book, work done was evaluated for Rs. 63, 449/- and, as such, Rs. 12, 551/- was due with the agent. It was asserted by the complainant that he never put his signature on any such paper since he was illiterate. On the aforesaid complaint, enquiry was conducted and witnesses were examined and thereafter the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sri A.K.Gupta, vide its order dated 10.5.2000 took cognizance of offences under Sections 419, 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code ,as indicated above.

(3.) Aggrieved with the order dated 10.5.2000, i.e. the order of cognizance, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the present petition, which was admitted on 12.9.2001. While admitting , this Court had directed for issuance of notice to Opp.Party No. 2 and in the meanwhile further proceeding in Complaint Case No. 1647C /1998 pending in the court of Mr. A.K.Gupta, J.M., Bettiah , as against the petitioner shall remain stayed. The order of stay is still continuing. From the record, it appears that after admission of the present petition, Opp.Party No. 2 appeared and filed a counter affidavit along with an Interlocutory Application vide I.A. No. 190 of 2002 with a prayer to vacate the order of stay dated 12.9.2001 as well as for modification of the order dated 12.9.2001 in Cr.Misc. No. 22718 of 2000 . The said petition was heard on 2.4.2002 and it was observed that the points taken in the interlocutory application on behalf of the Opp.Party No. 2 can very well be raised at the time of hearing of main application and the interlocutory application was directed to remain pending till then.