RAMAKANT PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Yesterday, when the case was called out, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner either to press this petition or to make a prayer for adjournment. However, as a last indulgence, the case was adjourned for the day with an indication that if on the next day, no one appears on behalf of the petitioner, the case shall be decided on the basis of materials available on the record even in absence of learned counsel for the petitioner. While adjourning the case by its order dated 13.5.2010, it was recorded that in this case, the interim order of stay is still continuing since 29.2.2000 and it appears that after obtaining the order of stay, the petitioner has lost interest in the present case and due to that reason none has come forward to press this petition.

(2.) Today again when the case was called out, none has come forward to press this petition.

(3.) The sole petitioner, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , has prayed for quashing of the order dated 9.7.1999 passed by Shri V.K.Jain, Judicial Magistrate, Buxar in Complaint Case No.315(C) of 1999/1173 T.R. Of 1999. By the said order, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offence under Section 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Short fact of the case is that Opp.Party no.2 initially filed a complaint case in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,Buxar vide Complaint Case No. 60( C) of 1998. The said complaint was referred to the police for its registration and investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and accordingly a case vide Buxar Town P.S. Case No.113 of 1998 was registered. While investigation was going on, the complainant apprehended that the police may not do justice with the investigation of the case and, as such, he filed a protest petition in the court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. Subsequently, the police submitted final form recommending the case as found untrue. The protest petition was treated as complaint and thereafter the complainant was examined on S.A. and in support of complaint three witnesses were examined at enquiry stage. After being satisfied with the materials brought at the stage of enquiry, the learned Magistrate by its order dated 7.9.1999 took cognizance of the offences as mentioned above and directed for issuance of process for securing attendance of the accused/petitioner.