ARJUN PRASAD SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the parties.

(2.) THE prayer of the petitioner in this application is to quash the order dated 20th September, 2000 whereby the cognizance of the offence under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code was taken by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad in C. P. Case No. 851/2000.

(3.) THE opposite party no. 2 Ramakant Mishra filed the aforesaid complaint petition against four accused persons named in the complaint petition including the petitioner alleging therein that Nilanchal Housing Cooperative Society Ltd. was a registered Society of which Rajendra Kumar Sinha and Dinesh Kumar Sinha were the Ex -President and Secretary whereas Dr. M. P. Jha and Arjun Prasad Singh (Petitioner) were the present Secretary of the said Society. The object of the Society was to provide land to its members on payment of cost for the same. The complainant and, his brother Shrikant Mishra were asked to deposit a sum of Rs. 57,0001 - by the then President and Secretary of the Society which was deposited by them. But the Ex -President and Secretary only gave receipt for an amount of Rs. 35,4501 - and for the rest amount Le. Rs. 21,5501 - they did not give any receipt and on being asked they replied that since the receipt book is under publication and therefore, the receipt may be given to them afterwards. On their assurance the balance amount of Rs. 21,5501 - was also paid to those accused persons. Both the accused did not give the receipt of the account on one pretext or the other. It is alleged that in spite of payment of cost for the land, the complainant and his brother were not provided any land and when a demand was made by them to the present President and the Secretary of the Society then they replied that since the amount was paid to the Ex -President and Secretary and therefore, it is for them to provide land. The complainant alleged that the accused persons committed fraud on him. They after receipt of the amount of the cost of the land, have devoured the said amount and thereby the complainant was cheated.