IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.44392 of 2007 Satya Narayan Prasad, Son of late Baiju Prasad, Resident of Village Pipra Bazar, P.S. Pipra, District East Champaran, presently posted as Accountant, Central Cooperative Consumers Store Ltd., East Champaran, Station Road, Motihari, P.O. & P.S. Motihari, District East Champaran. ------ Petitioner Versus 1. State of Bihar. 2. Vyas Baitha, Son of Daroga Baitha, Ex-Sales Assistant, Central Cooperative Consumers Store, East Champaran, Raxaul Branch, Resident of Village Bhelahi, P.S. Palanwa, District East Champaran. ---------- Opposite Parties ----------- 6 19.03.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. Despite service of notice on two occasions on the opposite party no.2, no one has appeared on his behalf. This Court on perusal of the complaint petition is satisfied that it is a malafide prosecution. The reasons for coming to this conclusion is also quite obvious, inasmuch as, it appears that the complainant was working as a Sales Assistant in a Cooperative Store at Motihari and was subjected to certificate proceedings for recovery of certain arrears of amount which was found recoverable in Certificate Case No. 15/88/89. In that view of the matter, if the complainant was taken into custody for not 2 paying the certificate amount, his allegation that such certificate case was lodged on the initiative of the petitioner, a Clerk in the same Cooperative Store, can hardly be a ground for launching of the criminal prosecution. The petitioner at present being an Accountant was under bounden duty to carry out the orders of the Registrar of the Cooperative Society for recovery of the amount of Cooperative. In that view of the matter, this Court would find that the allegation made in the present case would come into the category of inherent improbable case as laid down in the case of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab reported in AIR 1960 SC 866. Infact such a malicious prosecution if allowed to continue would itself amount to abuse of process of court. That being so, this Court would quash the entire prosecution including the impugned order taking cognizance as against the petitioner. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)