LAWS(PAT)-2010-5-10

BRIJ NANDAN PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On May 04, 2010
BRIJ NANDAN PRASAD SON OF SRI SUKULDEO PRASAD Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Three petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for the quashing of the order dated 10.8.1999 passed by Sri R.K.Singh, Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa in Complaint Case No.613 of 1999. By the said order, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offences 341,323,500 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Short fact of the case is that Opp.Party no.2 filed a complaint petition vide Complaint Case No.613 of 1999, disclosing therein that he was doing business work. He was having factory of iron melting and was manufacturing agricultural goods. It was disclosed in the complaint petition that accused persons were demanding illegal gratification. However, subsequently accused persons visited the business premises of the complainant and after abusing the complainant they also assaulted him. On this allegation, complaint petition was filed and after filing the complaint petition the complainant was examined on S.A. and finally by the impugned order dated 10.8.1999, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences under Sections 341,323,500 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. Aggrieved by the order of cognizance , the petitioners have filed the present petition.

(3.) Sri Naresh Dixit , learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the complaint petition was maliciously filed by the complainant. While referring to different Annexures to the petition, he submits that while they were discharging their official duties prior to the filing of the present petition, an inspection was done in the premises of the complainant and several irregularities were found. Learned counsel for the petitioners, while referring to Annexure-5 to the petition, submits that one of the allegations made against the complainant was that he had made interpolation in the official documents and, as such, show cause notice was issued to the complainant vide Annexure-5 to the petition.