BHATIA @ ANIL KUMAR BHATIA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed for transfer of Complaint Case No. 484 (C) of 2015 (Nawal Kishore Sharma Versus A.K. Bhatia and Another) from Biharsharif (Nalanda) Judgeship to Patna Judgeship for fair and impartial trial of the case.

(2.) The facts in short is that the opposite party no.2 filed a Complaint Case No. 484 (C) of 2015 in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda against the petitioner, who happens to be the Chairman of Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank and his P.A. alleging that he has been suspended on false allegation made by one Narayan Prasad of village Aungari while he was posted as Manager of Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank, Aungari Branch. It is also the case of the complainant that petitioner abated the complainant after alluring him to file this complaint against the opposite party no.2 with an allegation that in the tenure of his posting to Fixed Deposit Accounts of said Narayan Prasad and his wife was matured and the amount was deposited in his saving bank account. Thereafter, Narayan Prasad was got matured amount of Rs.50,000/- each fixed for further 12 months. Upon such instructions, two FD accounts were opened by the opposite party no.2 and receipts of deposit were issued by the opposite party no.2 which were handed over to Narayan Prasad. It is also his case that on 16.12.2013, when said Narayan Prasad came in his bank and enquired about his status of his fixed deposit accounts, it transpired that though the amount was available in his Saving Account but due to human error those amounts were not transferred in his FD Accounts. It is also his case that thereafter, on the written application of Narayan Prasad those two Fixed Deposit Accounts were cancelled. However, when the petitioner came to know about this fact, he called said Narayan Prasad through his Personal Secretary and Assistant Manager at Regional Office, Biharsharif and got prepared an application from said Narayan Prasad and got it forwarded to Regional Office, Biharsharif and thereafter, petitioner came to the Regional Office, Biharsharif and called the complainant in the Chamber of Regional Officer and threatened of his suspension and dismissal. It is also his case that thereafter, he was suspended which was objected by him. It is further his case that on 25.04.2015 while complainant was at Regional Office, Biharsharif, he was informed by co-accused, but thereafter, petitioner on 27.04.2015 at Biharsharif who would come there and to place his matter, an assurance was given to revoke his suspension. Thereafter, complainant reached at Biharsharif on 27.04.2015 and was asked to meet the petitioner at Elet Garden Restaurant and Marriage Hall, where petitioner demanded Rs. 1,00,000/- from him. On being opposed and showing his inability, he became angry and threatening and abusing him, causing insult to him.

(3.) The complainant filed a complaint petition on 29.04.2015 registered as Complaint Case No. 484 (C) of 2015. After enquiry, process were issued against the petitioner and other accused person. It is also alleged that thereafter, petitioner filed an application under Section 205 of Cr.P.C for exemption for day to day appearance. with an undertaking that when his presence may be required during the trial, he shall make himself available before the court but intentionally the court has rejected the prayer for dispensing the presence of the petitioner on 08.09.2015 and it was fixed for appearance during the closure of the Court and all these steps were taken to coerce the petitioner to succumb before the opposite party no.2 and exonerate him from the charges, though he is not the disciplinary authority nor has to pass the order, he is only Appellate Authority. It is further his case that the brother of the opposite party no.2 is a Lawyer at Biharsharif and he is very influential and at his instance such type of order has been passed.