K.G. Balakrishnan, J. - (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) These appeals are preferred against the judgment of the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana. Brief facts of the case are thus.
(3.) A crime was registered against the appellant alleging that he committed the offences punishable under Section 406 and 428 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant was a partner in a firm consisting of two partners, and the other partner, Zahir Ahmad, was the second accused before the Chief Judicial Magistrate. The appellant and Zahir Ahmad were running a rice mill by the name, Jagdamba Rice Mills. Under the policy of the State Government, the Civil Supplies Corporation entrusted the paddy to M/s Jagdamba Rice Mills for de-husking. There was an agreement between the firm and the corporation in terms whereof the firm was to supply advance rice to the corporation. As per the complaint of the Civil Supplies Corporation, the Jagdamba Rice Mill failed to supply the advance paddy due to the corporation. According to the corporation, about 1440 tons of rice was outstanding against the firm. Based on the complaint of the corporation, a case was registered and a report was filed before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangrur. The appellant, Kailash Verma filed an application for discharge alleging that he was only a sleeping partner and the entire business of the firm was being conducted by Zahir Ahmad, the co-accused. The appellant was discharged by the Chief Judicial Magistrate. The Chief Judicial Magistrate was of the view that the allegation contained in the complaint was of civil nature and no criminal case was made out. The Chief Judicial Magistrate also observed that there was no prima facie case to show that the paddy was supplied to the accused and that there was shortage of rice supplied to the corporation. The order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate was challenged by the corporation in a Revision filed before the Court of Sessions Judge, Sangrur. The Sessions Judge, after elaborately considering the question raised, upheld the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate. The Sessions Judge noticed the fact that the corporation had initiated arbitration proceedings against the Jagdamba Rice Mill and had also filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and that the filing of the present complaint alleging commission of offences punishable under Section 406 and 428 IPC was an abuse of the process of court. The corporation filed a further Revision before the High Court and by the impugned order the learned Single Judge set aside the order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangrur, as well as the order passed by the Sessions Judge. This order is challenged before us.;