UTTAM KUMAR HALDAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. In spite of notices having been issued to opposite party no. 2, which was duly received by him, as informed by the notice server, he has chosen not to appear. Hence, this application is being heard on merits.

(2.) Petitioners under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Cr.P.C.) seek quashing of the order dated 15.05.2012, passed by Sri R.K. Tiwary, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Aurangabad, in Complaint Case No. C-941/2011, whereby cognizance for the offence punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioners while issuing summons.

(3.) The brief facts of the case is that the complainant filed a complaint case before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad stating therein that he had insured himself with the LIC under the "Money Plus" policy from Aurangabad Branch in which he paid first annual premium of Rs. 20,000/- on 23.07.2007. The second premium of Rs. 20,000/- was deposited on 14.08.2008 through one Rajesh Kumar, who was a LIC agent. The 3rd premium of Rs. 20,000/- was deposited on 03.11.2009 again through Raj Kumar, LIC agent, but after five years he could take the surrender value that he approached the branch. The complainant alleged that it was informed by the petitioners, who were Chief Manager and Cashier respectively of the LIC Branch, that the said policy No. 515345955 was in a lapsed condition as the 3rd premium, which was deposited through cheque, the cheque had bounced, hence, the 3rd premium could not be appropriated towards the Insurance Policy, whereas the complainant stated that the 3rd premium was deposited in cash, which was misappropriated by the petitioners, hence, a complaint case was lodged.