DISTRICT-PATNA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Rajiv Roy, the learned counsel for the petitioner as also Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhaya, the learned A.P.P. for the State. Although the complainant, impleaded herein as Opp. Party No. 2 was duly served notice, he has chosen not to appear and contest this application.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner is against order dated 4.6.2007 passed by Sri Kishori Lal, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Vaishali at Hajipur in Complaint Case No. 226 of 2003, whereby he has rejected the prayer of the petitioner for his discharge. According to the complainant, there had been an oral agreement between him and the petitioner herein for transfer of the land, measuring an area of 3640 sq. ft. appertaining to Plot No. 750, Khata No. 95 belonging to the petitioner 'swife to the complainant for consideration money of Rs. 2.25 lacs and it is alleged that since the petitioner was in need of urgent money, a sum of Rs. 1.11 lacs was paid by the complainant to the petitioner as per the verbal agreement, the advance given was to be returned by 2.2.2003 and when on that date, the complainant went to the petitioner 'shouse to receive back the money which he had advanced, the petitioner refused to return the same. The complainant was, therefore, sanguine that the petitioner wanted to misappropriate and embezzle his fund.

(3.) AFTER due enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C, cognizance under Sections 406 and 420 I.P.C. was taken against the petitioner. It was felt by the petitioner that the allegations made in the complaint and the materials available in the enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C, no offence either Section 406 or 420 I.P.C. appeared to have been made out against him and, therefore, he filed a petition for discharge, but the learned Magistrate after due consideration of the materials available on the records, decided otherwise and rejected his prayer for his discharge.