RAVIJEET SINGH @ RAVIJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No. 2. This application has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding of C.P. Case No. 1590 of 2010 including the order dated 19.12.2011 whereby and whereunder the then Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Giridih took cognizance of the offence punishable under Sections 406 and 418 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner.

(2.) It is the case of the complainant-opposite party No. 2 that pursuant to the notice issued by G.D. Bagaria Sewa Sadan Hospital, M/s. Namdhari Health Care System engaged in carrying business of the medical equipment to which the petitioner is the proprietor submitted its quotation for installation of Central Oxygen Pipeline and accordingly, an agreement was entered into in between the opposite party No. 2 and the petitioner whereby the petitioner agreed to install Central Oxygen Pipeline in the Hospital on a condition of payment of Rs. 3,59,000/- and in fact, Oxygen Pipeline was laid but in course of time, it was found to be defective and therefore, repeated request was made to the petitioner for rectification of those defects but the petitioner did not pay any heed to the request of the opposite party No. 2 and thereby it remained lying useless and under the circumstances, there was no option left with the complainant but to file a complaint which was registered as C.P. Case No. 1590 of 2010 in which cognizance of the offences as aforesaid was taken, vide order dated 19.12.2011 which is under challenge.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that accepting the entire allegation to be true, no offence whatsoever either under Section 406 or under Section 418 of the Indian Penal Code is made out as it is never the case of misappropriation or cheating, rather the case of the complainant what has been made in the complaint is that defective Oxygen Pipeline was laid which was not rectified but this will not entail any criminal liability and thereby the order taking cognizance is fit to be quashed.