GYANENDRA JHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Mahendra Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Mayanand Jha, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, who appears on behalf of the State and Shri Dipak Kumar Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party No. 2/inforrnant.

(2.) The present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing of an order dated 17.11.2011 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patna in Pirbahore P.S. Case No. 48 of 2009/G.R. No. 878 of 2009. By the said order, the learned Magistrate has rejected the petition filed under Section 239 of the Cr PC on behalf of the petitioner as well as petition filed by some of he other co-accused.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that almost for the same allegation, two FIRs were lodged. First FIR i.e. Pirbahore P.S. Case No. 48 of 2009 was lodged on 19.2.2009 under Sections 406, 420 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code on the basis of written information submitted by the informant le. opposite party No. 2 against the petitioner and another. Subsequently, opposite party No. 2 filed a complaint case i.e. Complaint Case No. 1209(C) of 2009 in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, which was subsequently registered as Pirbahore P.S. Case No. 216 of 2009 on 12.6.2009 for the offence under Sections 406, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code against other accused persons. However, subsequently, by the order of the Court, both the FIRs were amalgamated and after investigation, police submitted charge-sheet against the petitioner and other accused persons, who were made accused in subsequent FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on perusal of the said FIR it is evident that it is a dispute of purely civil in nature. It was further submitted that in the first FIR, it was indicated that petitioner had said on non-judicial stamp paper that he will return Rs. 30 lacs, i.e. defalcated amount, to the informant.