RAHUL RAJ Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mrs. Ritu Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. K. P. Deo, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party No. 2.

(2.) IN this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the First Information Report which has been instituted against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and read with Sections 3(i)(viii)(x) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989.

(3.) AN F.I.R. was instituted against the petitioner by the informantopposite party No. 2 in which it was stated that the informant when he was not selected for counseling in the Medical Examination, he came in contact with the petitioner who assured the informant that if he arranged Rs. 8,00,000/ - he will be admitted to MGM, College, Jamshedpur. On the assurance of the petitioner Rs. 6.5 lakhs was paid to the petitioner by the informant but when the informant could not get admission in MGM, College, Jamshedpur, he requested for return of the money at which the petitioner issued a cheque of Rs. 1,00,000/ - which was subsequently dishonoured and when the informant again approached to the petitioner, he was abused in the name of his caste. It was also alleged that on 05.03.2014 the pleader's notice was sent to the father of the informant on behalf of the petitioner levelling allegation of cheating and it was also informed therein that a complaint case being Complaint Case No. 572 of 2014 has been instituted against the father of the informant.