- (1.) This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the prayer that the order dated 6-7-1996 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau in complaint case No. 252 of 1995 be quashed and further proceedings in the case be stayed.
(2.) Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged. Heard Sri V. P. Srivastava, learned Counsel for the applicants, Sri Viresh Misra, learned Counsel for the opposite party No. 2 as well as learned A.G.A.
(3.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the opposite party No. 2, namely, Sri Mushtaq Ahmad filed a complaint in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau against the present applicants for summoning them under Sections 409/420/467/468, I.P.C. The complainant was a teacher in a School known as Madarsa Faize-Aam in Mohalla Maunath Bhanjan P.S. Kotwali, district Mau. The applicants were the Manager, Head Master, Teacher and Accountant in the said School. the complainant-opposite party had gone to Saudi Arbia in the year 1985 for higher studies. On his return in the year 1988, he came to know that the applicants had fraudulently withdrawn a sum of Rs. 6368.00 on account of salary and a sum of Rs. 28,000.00 as Dearness Allowance payable to the complainant by making his forged signatures. On the complaint dated 20-3-1991 filed by the opposite party No. 2, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau, after taking into consideration the evidence recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., summoned the applicants in the aforesaid complaint case under Sections 406/409/420/467/468, I.P.C. Against the summoning order, the applicants filed a Criminal Misc. Petition No. 14761 of 1995 under Section 482, Cr.P.C. The summoning order was set aside by order dated 15-3-1995 in proceeding u/S. 482, Cr.P.C. The opposite party complainant went before Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing a Special Leave Petition No. 2058 of 1995 (Appeal No. 122 of 1996), which was allowed on 31-1-96. The order passed by this Court was set aside and it was directed that the concerned Magistrate shall proceed with the complaint in accordance with law. Thereafter, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Mau issued processes against the applicants to procure their attendance in the complaint case. The applicants again filed another Criminal Misc. application No. 953 of 1996, u/S. 482, Cr.P.C. against the order passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, whereby prayer of the applicants that they be released on personal bonds in accordance with the provisions of Section 88, Cr.P.C. was rejected. This application was dismissed on 26-3-1996. It appears that the applicants appeared before the court below and moved a number of applications, which were rejected.;