MAUSAMI BANO @ MOSMA BANU W/O ABDUL JABBAR; ABDUL JABBAR S/O OF SHAMSHER SARKAR, MD HABIBUR RAHMAN YAD ALI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR, JAHRUL ISLAM S/O ABDUL MANDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The three petitioners who have been arrayed as accused in Complaint Case No. 1383 of 2007 have prayed for the quashing of the order dated 23.11.2007 passed therein by Sri Raman Kumar, Judicial Magistrate, 1 st Class, Katihar, whereby he has taken cognizance of offences under Sections 417 and 420 IPC.

(2.) One Jahrul Islam, the complainant, impleaded as O.P. No. 2 herein, filed the said complaint against the accused, inter alia, alleging that accused Nos. 2 and 3 visited his house some 7 months ago assured him to arrange for appointment of his widowed daughter in the Gram Panchayat where appointments were to be made shortly and he should arrange for money. The complainant went to petitioner No. 1 who is the Mukhiya along with his son and enquired about the demand and statement of petitioner No. 3 upon which petitioner No. 1 demanded Rs. one lac for the appointment to the widowed daughter of the complainant and directed the complainant to deposit the money with petitioner No. 3 and there after the complainant handed over Rs. 30,000/- to petitioner No. 1 and promised to pay the balance amount and there after petitioner No. 1 and 2 went to the house of the complainant and there after the complainant handed over rest Rs. 70,000/- to the petitioners and thereafter the petitioners after receiving the amount obtained the signature of the complainant and his son on a blank paper. However, the petitioners did not appoint his daughter and also did not return the money to the complainant and when the complainant proposed for convening a panchayati then the petitioners assaulted the complainant by fists and slaps.

(3.) It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they have been falsely implicated in this case as would be apparent from the fact that the complainant has not stated regarding the post for which he wanted his daughter to be appointed. It was also submitted that the complainant had failed to disclose the source from where he managed to procure Rs. one lac for payment.