DHARMENDRA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Ajay Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

(2.) The petitioner has moved the Court under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code') for the following relief:

(3.) The petitioner along with four others has been made accused by the opposite party no. 2 alleging that he had good terms with the opposite party no. 2 and had persuaded her to invest in Panjon Finance (hereinafter referred to as the "Company") and she had invested in the name of his minor son and the agreement was also executed between the parties on 14 th January, 2006 and it was stipulated that shares would mature after four years when repayment would be made to the complainant by the Company. It was further alleged that upon the term expiring, despite several reminders and request to pay back the amount in terms of the agreement, the same was not done leading to filing of the present complaint. Moreover, in the compliant, it was also mentioned that earlier also a cheque issued by the petitioner was not encashed for which criminal proceedings were instituted and cognizance taken against him and he was also arrested and thereafter he was released on provisional bail upon depositing the amount in Court which was also paid by the petitioner.