DILIP GOYAL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsels for both the sides. This writ application has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings relating to Mango P.S Case No.54 of 2001, arising out of C-1 Case No. 152 of 2001 for the offences under Sections 406, 420, 193, 120-B, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. It may be stated here that this writ application was earlier allowed by order dated 1.3.2001, but the said order was set aside by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 18.1.2002 in Cr.Appeal No. 86 of 2002, as the order was passed by this Court without noticing the respondent, on whose complaint, the learned Magistrate had directed for the investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the said order was set aside and this Court was directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India to reconsider the matter after giving an opportunity of hearing to the complainant and as such, the matter was re-admitted and notice was issued to the complainant-respondent no.2 who has since appeared.

(2.) From perusal of the complaint case filed by the respondent no.2, it appears that the complainant was the Managing Director of an industrial unit namely M/s Everest Electrical and Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd. and the complaint petition mainly deals with the retirement of the complainant from the said business and induction of the accused nos. 1 and 2, namely, Sanjay Dubey and Smt. Rina Dubey as the Directors in the said company, with which the petitioner has no concern. The petitioner has been made accused no.3 in the case and so far as this petitioner is concerned, it is alleged that while leaving the company, the complainant had left some undated blank or filled up signed cheques which were converted / fabricated to be used as genuine instruments by the accused nos. 1 and 2 and were handed over to the accused no.3, i.e this petitioner, in connivance, who presented the cheques for encashment and got the same dishonored from the bank. It also appears from the complaint petition itself that several cases were filed upon the complainant by the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act as the said cheques issued by the complainant were dishonored. So far the allegation against this petitioner is concerned, the same is mentioned in paragraph 29 of the complaint petition which is reproduced here-in-below:

(3.) It appears that the said complaint petition was sent by the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur for institution of the police case, on the basis of which, Mango P.S Case No. 54 of 2001 corresponding to G.R No. 339 of 2001 was instituted for the aforesaid sections. The institution and continuation of the proceedings in the said criminal case has been challenged by the petitioner in this writ application.