IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.20248 of 1998 Ajay Kumar Thakur, son of late Prof. Amarnath Thakur, resident of village- Chanpura, Police Station- Benipatti, district Madhubani at present posted as Senior Manager, Dena Bank, Mauryalok, Patna ... ... petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Dr. Braj Nandan Sahay, son of late Lalji Sahay, Retired professor of Eye, resident of Mohalla- Khaja Sarai, Police Station- Laheriasarai, district Darbhanga .... .... opposite Parties ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate For the Complainant: Mr. Dharmeshwar Mishra, Advocate For the State: Mr. Amarendra Prasad, A.P.P ----------- 6 16-04-2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the complainant/ Opposite Party No.2. The petitioner has prayed for quashing of order of cognizance dated 20-7-1998 passed by Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga in C. R. No. 525/1998 relating to offences under sections 403, 409 and 418 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on a careful perusal of the complaint petition in its entirety it is clear that complainant is aggrieved because four cheques deposited by him in the Dena Bank, Patna where the petitioner was Senior Manager got misplaced or lost and this caused financial loss and harassment to the complainant. It has been submitted that ultimately on account of prompt action by the petitioner in making correspondence with the Unit Trust of India which had issued the cheques the misplaced cheques could not be encashed by mischievous elements and ultimately the complainant 2 received the principal amount, after some delay. Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that no doubt the principal amount of the four cheques were ultimately received by the complainant but he suffered loss of interest for some period and he also suffered harassment due to defect of service of the bank and on account of negligence by the officials of the bank. Having considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the parties, it is found that in the ultimate analysis the allegations do not make out a criminal offence but only a case where the complainant might have suffered loss of interest and some harassment on account of prima facie negligence by the concerned officials of the bank. Hence, the prayer to quash the complaint case insofar as it relates to the petitioner is allowed but with liberty to the complainant that, if so advised, he may pursue his claim for compensation for loss of interest or harassment etc. before the Consumer Forum or before the Civil Court, if not filed already. BKS/- (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)