IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.46311 of 2009 KRISHNA BHATTACHARYA . Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR . ----------- 2. 2.4.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, for the State and for the Opposite Party No. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of cognizance dated 8.9.2009 in Complaint Case No. 1504(C) of 2009 under Sections 323, 384, 379 and 504 of the Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that reading the complaint as it is, it discloses a master- servant relationship which came to be severed subsequently when the complainant resigned from the job and now stakes his claim for arrears of salary for which the forum and remedy is civil and different. Opposing the application learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, submits that the allegations have also been made that not only release of salary was refused but he was abused assaulted and his wrist watch snatched by a junior employee signature allegedly obtained on the blank paper with a threat to implicate him in false cases. Moreover, the petitioner also filed a case under Section 409 of the Penal Code against the opposite party on 4.6.2009. 2 If the parties have filed cases against each other and the opposite party no. 2 is aggrieved by the case filed against him, his remedy lies in a different proceeding. This Court is satisfied that the present allegations are nothing but a coercive attempt to obtain the alleged arrears of salary by what may be described as a short cut method instead of taking recourse to the normal civil laws of the land. There is no allegation that the allegedly blank papers with signature obtained have been misused for any particular purpose. What was the nature of the abuse and assault has also not been mentioned in the complaint. Interpreting Section 504 of the Cr. P.C. it has been held by judicial pronouncement that there has to be something more alleged to invoke that provision by even a brief reference to the nature of the abuse etc. In so far as the allegations for snatching of the wrist watch is concerned, this Court is of the opinion that it is only an embellishment as the complainant has not even chosen to mention either in the complaint or in his statement on SA, an issue as simple as the nature and make on watch that he was wearing. This Court is satisfied that essentially the grievance of the petitioner pertains to a civil forum for 3 arrears of salary and to permit the criminal prosecution to continue shall be an abuse of the process of law.. The impugned order dated 8.7.2009 passed by the Judicial Magistrate IInd Class Patna in Complaint Case No. 1504 (C ) of 2009 and the entire proceeding in the complaint case is hereby quashed. The application stands allowed. P. Kumar (Navin Sinha, J.)