Decided on November 21,2012

Subhash Chand Jasuja And Another Appellant
State of Uttarakhand and another Respondents


- (1.) It is pertinent to mention that none has turned up on behalf of the private respondent no. 2 Arun Sikhola despite sufficient service though name of his Counsel appear in the cause list. Hence, this Court rendered hearing to learned Counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State. Also perused the papers on record.
(2.) It appears that an FIR was lodged on 16.2.2005 by Arun Sukhola against eight accused persons, who were the office bearers to run the administration of a Ashram, namely Arya Vanprasth Ashram based at Haridwar. Way back in November, 2001, a contract took place between Arun Sukhola and the erstwhile office bearers Subhash Chand Jasuja and BB Singhal (applicants) of the Ashram for getting some construction work done in the said Ashram. The payment made in advance to the contractor Arun Sukhola for the said purpose was short to the extent of 15 per cent and it was promised that the same would be paid after completion of the work. The contractor completed the work in March, 2003. By that time, the administration of the Ashram came in the hands of other persons, namely, Smt. Rukmani Arya, Ved Muni, Raghunandan and Mool Chand, but the amount of security to the tune of Rs. 5,85,000/-, which was deducted out of the payment of construction amount, was not returned to Mr. Sukhola. He ran from pillar to post for the refund from the office bearers of the Ashram, but in vain. So, he lodged the FIR.
(3.) Investigation resulted in submission of chargesheet against the present applicants and their successors in administration of the Ashram for the offences under Section 406, 506 IPC. Hence, this petition has been filed for quashing of the chargesheet.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.