IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.16474 of 2010 1. MANISH KUMAR SON OF SRI M.P. SINGH, SR. MANAGER, ZONAL HUMAN RESOURCES AT H.D.F.C. STANDARD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, 22 COMMUNITY CENTRE, NEW FRIEND’S COLONY, NEW DELHI- 110065 2. BIPIN KUMAR KERKETTA SON OF SRI JULIOUS CHARIS KERKETTA, AT H.D.F.C. STANDARD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. JHA NIWAS OPPOSITE HOTEL YUVRAJ, DIVERSION ROAD, DORANDA, RANCHI 3. MANOJ KUMAR SINHA SON OF SRI KRISHNA CHANDRA PRASAD, AREA MANAGER, CHANNEL DEVELOPMENT AT H.D.F.C. STANDARD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, PUSPANJALI COMPLEX, OPPOSITE ALANKAR PALACE, BORING ROAD, PATNA-1 4. H.D.F.C. STANDARD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD THROUGH HARSH MISHRA SON OF SRI RAM KISHORE MISHRA, LEGAL AND COMPLIANCE SERVICE DEVELOPMENT AT H.D.F.C. STANDARD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. NORTH-2, ZONAL OFFICE, 1ST FLOOR, HALWASIA HOUSE M.G.MARG, HAJRATGANJ, LUCKNOW-226001 5. BHAWANAVERMA, DAUGHTER OF LATE B.N. VERMA, EXECUTIVE, REGIONAL HUMAN RESOURCES AT H.D.F.C. STANDARD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, BASUDEO PLAZA, KANKARBAGH, PATNA-20 6. H.D.F.C. STANDARD LIFE INSURANCE LTD. REGISTERED OFFICE REMON HOUSE, L.I.T. PAREKH MARG, 169 BACKBAY RECLAMATION CHURCH GATE, MUMBAI-400020 THROUGH WARISH KUMAR SINHA S/O LT. S.K. SINHA …….. PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. JAYANT KRISHNA SON OF SHRI JYOTI KRISHNA AGARWAL, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA ADITYA NAGAR, BEHIND YADAV POULTRY FARM, JAGDEO PATH, P.S. HAWAI ADDA, PATNA – 14 ….. OPPOSITE PARTIES ----------- For the Petitioners: Mr. Alok Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Indrajeet Bhushan, Advocate Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate For the State: Mr. Satyendra Prasad, A.P.P. For O.P.No.2: Mr. Navin Kumar, Advocate -------- 2. 6.1.2011 The petitioners have sought quashing of the order dated 9.3.2010 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Patna in Complaint case No.305(c) of 2010, by which he has taken cognizance u/ss.418, 420, 465, 506 and 120B I.P.C. 2 The case of the complainant is that he was appointed in the H.D.F.C. Standard Life Insurance Company Ltd., but he was obstructed from working in Patna office by the officials posted therein and in a conspiracy hatched between them he was dismissed from service falsely showing that he had submitted his resignation. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the opposite party no.2 was appointed as a Channel Development Manager on probation on 17.9.2009 and one day later was transferred to Dhanbad since there was vacancy, but the transfer order was served on him on 12.10.2009 despite which the opposite party no.2 refused to go to Dhanbad. The management tolerated the opposite party no.2 since they did not want a scene in the office and finally for disobeying the orders of transfer he was dismissed from service on 30.11.2009 which termination letter was served upon on 23.12.2009. About two months later the present complaint has been instituted obviously with a malicious intent to harass them. On a specific query from the Counsel of the complainant as to what offence is made out in the facts of the case, he is unable to satisfy this Court as to whether any offence whatsoever is made out against the accused persons. On going through the complaint, I am of the opinion that no offence is made out against the accused persons 3 and the complaint is nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court. In view of such, this application is allowed and the order dated 9.3.2010 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Patna in Complaint case No.305(c) of 2010 is quashed. Narendra/ ( Anjana Prakash, J. )