SRINATH SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State, as also learned counsel for the complainant opposite party No.2.

(2.) PETITIONER is aggrieved by the order dated 25.1.2000 passed by Sri S. K. Agnihotri, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bokaro at Chas, in C.P. Case No.120 of 1998, whereby the cognizance for the offence under Sections 406, 420 and 323 of the I.P.C., was taken by the learned Court below against the petitioner.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order taking cognizance against the petitioner is absolutely illegal and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case, in as much as, the petitioner had given the money to the complainant as friendly loan, which was returned thorough the cheque by the complainant and when the cheque was produced in the Bank, the cheque bounced and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case by the complainant. Learned counsel has submitted that in any event, there is no allegation in the entire complaint petition that the said cheque was ever enchased by the petitioner or any money was entrusted to the petitioner and accordingly, no offence can be said to be made out for the offence under Sections 406 and 420 of the I.P.C. Learned counsel accordingly, submitted that the impugned order taking cognizance is absolutely illegal and cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.