CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24343 OF 2000 -------- In the matter of an application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. -------- MUNESHWAR RAJAK son of late Bhattu Rajak, resident of MIG Sector-3, Block-2, Flat No.44, Housing Colony, Bahadurpur, P.S.-Kankerbagh, District-Patna. ……. ……..Petitioner Versus 1.STATE OF BIHAR 2.Rajiv Kumar son of Sri Ram Nandan Prasad Singh, MIG 350, Lohia Nagar, Kankerbagh Patna. ……. ……Opp.Parties -------- For the petitioner: Mr.Ram Suhawan Singh Mr.Chandra Moleshwar For the State : Mrs. Veena Kumari Jaiswal. A.P.P. -------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR --------- Rakesh Kumar,J. The sole petitioner, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, has prayed for quashing of an order dated 24.01.2000 passed by Shri B P Singh, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna in Complaint Case No 1151C of 1999. By the said order, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Short fact of the case is that opposite party no.2, who claims to be an Advocate, filed a complaint case which was registered as Complaint Case No 1151C of 1999 alleging therein that the petitioner who was a retired Government servant approached the complainant for purchasing a jeep of the complainant for a sum of Rs 1,50,000/-. It was alleged that the petitioner paid only Rs 40,000/- and, thereafter, the vehicle was handed over to the petitioner. It was assured by the petitioner that the rest amount would be subsequently paid to the complainant. 2 However, the petitioner dishonestly did not make payment of entire sale proceed and, accordingly, on such allegation, the complaint was filed. After conducting enquiry, the learned Magistrate by his order dated 24.01.2000 took cognizance of the offences under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Aggrieved with the order of cognizance, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the present petition. On 18.10.2001, while issuing notice to opposite party no.2, this Court directed that till any order is passed, further proceeding in Case No 1151C of 1999 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna shall remain stayed. Despite service of notice, opposite party no.2 did not choose to appear and, as such, on 19.02.2002, the case was admitted for hearing and this Court directed that pending final hearing of this application, interim order dated 18.10.2001 shall remain operative. While admitting this case, this Court also directed for issuance of notice to opposite Party No 2 under registered cover with A/D as also under ordinary course. Despite issuance and service of notice on opposite party no.2 again, opposite party no.2 preferred not to appear in the present case. 4. Shri Ram Suhawan Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner was a retired Government servant and after receipt of the retiral dues, he approached the complainant regarding purchase of his jeep and he made entire payment to him. The complainant sworn affidavit regarding transfer of the vehicle to the petitioner and no objection certificate was also granted. Thereafter, the vehicle was got registered in the name of the petitioner and 3 Patna High Court The 28th July,2010 Md.S/NAFR only with a view to further take money, the complainant lodged a false complaint. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to affidavit, transfer certificate etc. which have been annexed with the present petition and are kept at pages 18 to 27 of the present petition. Accordingly, it has been submitted that the order of cognizance as well as entire criminal proceeding in Complaint Case No 1151C of 1999 is liable to be set aside. 5. Mrs.Veena Kumari Jaiswal, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State, even in absence of opposite party no 2, has opposed the prayer of the petitioner. 6. Besides hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and the State, I have also perused the materials available on record. In view of the facts and circumstances,as has been pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that present complaint petition was not filed fairly and honestly and, as such, for the ends of justice, it is necessary to interfere with the order of cognizance. 7. Accordingly, the order of cognizance dated 24.01.2000 passed by Shri B.P.Singh, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna in Complaint Case No 1151C of 1999 is hereby set aside and the petition stands allowed. (Rakesh Kumar,J.)