IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.53626 of 2007 SHIV KUMAR DIDWANIA SON OF LATE RAMAUTAR DIDWANIA PROPRIETOR OF M/S SHIV GAURI ENTERPRISE, RESIDENT OF DR. R.P. ROAD, NEAR MARWARI PATHSHALA, P.S. KOTWALI, DIST. BHAGALPUR. --- PETITIONER Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. SRI SANJEET KUMAR SINGH SON OF SRI SHIV CHANDRA SINGH R/O LANKATOLA,SHASTRI NAGAR, P.S. K.HAT, DIST. PURNEA, PERMANENT R/O DIGHKALA, P.S. SADAR, DIST. VAISHALI, HAZIPUR. -- OPP.PARTIES. ----------- 04 03.09.2010 Both sides present. Petitioner has challenged the order dated 11.06.2007 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Purnea in Complaint case no. 2193 of 2006 ( Sanjeet Kumar Singh vs. Shiv Gauri Enterprises and Ors.) whereby on a perusal of the materials adduced in course of enquiry it has been found that a prima facie case under Section 420 and 406 of the Penal Code are made out. Petitioner also assails the revisional order dated 09.10.07 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Purnea in criminal revision no. 300 of 2007 whereby the revision preferred against the initial order passed by the learned Magistrate was confirmed. As per the complaint opposite party no.2 alleged that he had shop at Madhubani Bazar and for that purpose he contacted M/s Shiv Gauri and C.N.F.Agent of the Company (petitioner). He was made to understand that a sum of Rs. 40,000/- was required to be deposited by way of demand draft as security deposit initially and thereafter the company shall supply cement from Durgapur unit as per the requirement and demand made. He was further made to understand that on the date of opening of the shop senior officers of the company would come and then the draft should be given. It is alleged that on 03.02.2006 the opening ceremony of the shop was held whereafter the two drafts were handed over to the proprietor of the aforesaid Shiv Gauri Enterprises. It was assured that cement shall be supplied to him and the cost thereof will have to be deposited by the complainant within 10 days. Supplies of some cement were made but thereafter it was discontinued. With these allegation the complaint was lodged. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present proceeding has been quashed in relation to the officers of aforesaid M/s Shiv Gauri enterprises. He handed in the certified copy of the order dated 21.04.2008, passed in Cr. Misc. no. 35729 of 2007 (Pritam Sen Gupta & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Anr.) in support of his aforesaid contention which is kept on record marked ‘Y’. I have gone through the reasons assigned by a learned Bench of this Court while allowing aforesaid application. In my view, the reasons assigned therein also hold good in the case of the petitioner. Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned A.P.P. appearing in the present case, after going through the judgment marked as ‘Y’ submits that the case of the petitioner seems to be squarely covered by the reasons assigned in the said order. Thus, for the reasons disclosed in Cr. Misc. no. 35729 of 2007 ( Pritam Sen Gupta & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Anr.), this Court is persuaded to allow the present application also. Consequently the application is allowed. Accordingly the two impugned orders dated 11.06.2007 passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class Purnea in complaint case no. 2193 of 2006, and revisional order dated 09.10.2007 passed by Sessions Judge Purnea in Cr. Rev. no. 300 of 2007 are hereby quashed and set aside in so far as the petitioner is concerned. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)