RASH BIHARI SARDAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 26.03.2015, passed by S.D.J.M. Bokaro, in C.P. Case No. 1007 of 2012, whereby and whereunder, learned court below come to the conclusion that prima-facie case made out against the petitioners under Sections 420/406/467/468/471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and accordingly, issued summons to the accusedpetitioners.

(2.) It is submitted that initially, respondent No. 2 ( complainant) has filed a complaint case bearing C.P. Case No. 738 of 2011 which was sent to the officer-in-charge of Harla police station for registration and investigation of case under Section 156 (3) of the Cr. P.C. Accordingly, Harla P.S. Case No. 11 of 2012 registered and police took up investigation. It is further submitted that after investigation, police submitted final form in favour of accusedpetitioners and recommended for prosecution of respondent No. 2 under Sections 182/211 of the Indian Penal Code. Thereafter respondent No. 2 filed a protest petition on 14.08.2012. Thereafter statement of respondent No. 2 recorded on S.A. Then, the Magistrate examined three witnesses during enquiry. Thereafter on 26.03.2015, he found that prima-facie offences made out against the petitioners under Sections 420/406/467/468/471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) It is submitted by Sri P.S. Dayal, learned counsel for the petitioners that while passing the impugned order, learned S.D.J.M. has not applied his mind to the facts of this case. He submits that from perusal of impugned order it is clear that learned Magistrate had not even discussed the facts of the case, as well as the statement of complainant and other witnesses recorded by him and in the most mechanical manner, he stated that the witnesses had supported the subject matter of the complaint. Sri Dayal submits that aforesaid order of learned S.D.J.M. is against the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pepsi Foods and Another versus Special Judicial Magistrate and Others, 1998 5 SCC 749.