PARAS RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by Parasram and Tejumal for quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioners in criminal case No. 506/76 Under Sections 420, 468 and 109 I.P.C. pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Hanumangarh.

(2.) A complaint was filed by one Sushil Kumar against four persons including Parasram petitioner for the offences Under Section 420 and 468 IPC in the court of first Class Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Hanumangarh, That complaint was sent by the learned Magistrate for investigation Under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. The police registered the case and after investigation it did not find sufficient ground for putting up a challan agains Gopal. The other three including the petitioner Parasram were challaned but one Tojumal petitioner No. 2 was included, whose name did rot find in the complent. Thus the challan was put up against Tirathdas, Narayan Das, Paras Ram Tejumal. Tejumal was charged for the offences Under Section 420/109 and 408/109 I.P.C. Paras Ram was charged for the offence Under Section 420 and 468 I.P.C. by the learned Magistrate vide his impugned order dated 25.8.77. It is against this order that the petitioners Paras Ram and Tejumal have preferred this petition.

(3.) THE contention of Mr. Singhvi is that Tejumal is neither the partner in the firm nor he had been with Tirathdas and Narayan Das at the time of the purchase of the goods and handing over the cheque. His name also does not appear in the complaint, He has taken me through the complaint, statement of Sushil Kumar recorded by the police during investigation and has urged that no case Under Section 420/109 and 468/139 IPC was made against Tejumal and the court while framing the charge against him has abused the process of the court and in the interest of justice this order be quashed. So also he has submitted that Parasram was a partner in the firm but he was merely a sleeping partner and was not involved in the alleged incident.