GHULAM RASOOL GANAI Vs. GHULAM MOHD. MATHANGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has invoked jurisdiction of this Court under Sec. 561A, Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code'), to seek quashing of proceedings initiated against him by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Charari Sharief, on a complaint, for offences under secs. 420 & 409 RPC, filed by the respondent. Heard. I have perused the record.

(2.) Record on the trial Court file reveals that upon taking cognizance of the complaint, filed by the respondent on 24.01.2009, learned Magistrate seems to have recorded the statements of respondent and two witnesses appearing for him. However, order passed on that date shows that learned Magistrate without taking into consideration the allegations stated in the complaint or statements of complainant and witnesses, straightway proceeded to issue process against the petitioner. Case came to be adjourned repeatedly right up to the month of September, 2009. Thereafter, learned Magistrate gone into the process and issued non-bailable warrants against the petitioner to secure his presence in the Court.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would say that the parties were involved in the business of purchase and sale of dry fruits. Complaint discloses that the dispute arises out of the said business and the respondent has sought intervention of the Court for redressal of his grievance. The complaint does not disclose commission of any offence, much less, offence under secs. 420 or 409 RPC and redressal of business dispute could not have been sought by filing the complaint before the learned Magistrate. Learned counsel further submitted that learned Magistrate has fallen into an error, firstly, by taking cognizance of the complaint and secondly, by issuing process against the petitioner without even applying his mind as to whether prima facie case for proceeding against the petitioner was made out or not.