MAHENDRA SAO @ MAHENDRA SAH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present case arises out of a complaint dated 25.09.2012 bearing Complaint Case No. 2738 of 2012 filed by one Santosh Kumar before the learned court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna, inter alia, alleging therein that the accused persons had promised for admission of the son of the complainant in the Engineering course for which they had demanded a sum of Rs. 7,00,000/-. Consequently, the complainant is said to have given a sum of Rs. 1,90,000/- in cash. Thereafter, the complainant is said to have given a cheque of Rs. 5.00,000/- on 25.08.2012. Subsequently, the complainant had given a sum of Rs. 5 lacs in cash to the accused persons, however, when his son was not admitted in the Engineering course, he had demanded refund of the said sum of Rs. 6,90,000/- from the accused persons, however, the same was not refunded. It has been further alleged that the accused persons had called the complainant on 23.09.2012 in a temple at Bailey Road, Patna, where the accused persons and others had abused him and threatened him that they would murder the son of the complainant in case the accused persons ever demanded refund of money and had also snatched gold chain from the neck of the complainant.

(2.) The learned court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna, by an order dated 16.04.2013 has not found sufficient material to take cognizance under Sections 384 , 406 , 420 , 504 and 120B / 34 of the Indian Penal Code, however, he has found enough material to proceed under Sections 418 , 323 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code and has consequently, summoned the accused persons.

(3.) Another aspect of the case is that one of the accused of the aforesaid complaint case, filed by the complainant- Opposite Party No.2 herein, has filed a Complaint Case bearing Complaint Case No. 1127 of 2012 before the learned court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaimur (Bhabua) against the complainant of the aforesaid case, inter alia, alleging therein that the Opposite Party No.2 herein had asked for a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- from the petitioner no.1 herein for the purposes of purchasing land at Patna. Thereafter, the Opposite Party No.2 herein had given a cheque of Rs. 5,00,000/-, which was deposited by the petitioner no.1 in his account on 04.09.2012, but the same was dishonoured on account of their being insufficient funds in the account of the Opposite Party No.2 herein. The petitioner no.1 herein is said to have asked for refund of the amount, but the Opposite Party No.2 herein has refused to return the money. It is also submitted that in the said complaint Case No. 1127 of 2012, cognizance has been taken by the learned trial court on 01.02.2013.