HIGH CQUR"? §F C%-%HATT£$GARH R? BlLiaa$i9i5Fi isa: Hcn’hle Mr.T.P.$i1arma1J.1 Cr. MP. No. 3&2 of 2608 Shri Neeraj Choubey counsel for the petitioners. Shri Santosh Bharat counsel for the respondent PETtTiON UNDER SECTtON $82 OF THE C9DE OF CRiMiNAL PROGEDURE. {cage} oRoeR (4.9.2008) This petition is directed against the order dated 214.2005 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jagdaipur in Criminal Case No. 605/2005 directing for registration of the case under section 392 of the indian Penal Code against the petitioners and issued notice to them 2. The order is challenged on the ground that the petitioners are the officers oft the lnddsind Bank Ltd. and they have not committed any robbery and the allegations made against them do not tall Within the‘provisions of section 392 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; 3. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the material avaitable on record. 4. Order impugned reveals that after making inquiry under sections 200 and 202 of the Code of Criminal rocedure the‘trial Court took cognizance on the complaint and directed for registration of the offence under section 302 of the IPC and issued notice to the petitioners and thereafter the warrant of arrest has aieo been issued against them. 1. Chandrashekhar Jabukar, S/o Dayaram PETIT10NERS Jabulkar, Aged about 37»years, Rio CH3 mdusim Bank Ltd. Transpm Nagar, Kerba, CG 2. Shyam Sawant Slo T.C. Samant, aged about 34 years R/o C/o lndusind‘Bank Ltd Geedam Road; Jagdalpur (CG VERSUS RESPGNDEN? ' Arun Singh S/o Ranvir Singh, Aged about 35 years, R/o Viiiage Bastar; Tehsi} Jagdaipur, District Bastar (CG) 5‘ J do not. find any it accordingly the petition is liab!e to be dismissed and the admission stage itseif. 6. Consequentl iA isposed of. iegaiity and irregularity in the order impugned and is accordingly dismissed at Non D2f2008 for taking documents on record also stands Sdl- T. P. har it y d i Sma a