M.S.K. Jaiswal, J. - (1.) THE petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing all further proceedings in C.C. No. 1535 of 2008 on the file of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, registered under Section 500 IPC.
(2.) THE petitioner is shown as an accused and in the year 2008, he was working as Senior Branch Manager at Bank of India, Overseas Branch, Waltair Main Road, Visakhapatnam. At that time, the 1st respondent/complainant was working as Computer Terminal Operator in the same bank. When the present petition is filed in the year 2011, the petitioner/accused was working as a Chief Manager, Bank of India, Kolhapur, Maharashtra and the respondent/complainant is said to have taken voluntary retirement from the bank services. The averments of the complaint, in brief, are as under: - - "On 22 -10 -2007 at about 03.15 p.m., the petitioner/accused called the 1st respondent/complainant to his chambers and informed her that one P.S. Rao from Zonal Office came there to inquire into the complaint lodged against the 1st respondent/complainant by one Mrs. Lina Tirkey, Deputy Manager (Admn). The Officer informed the 1st respondent that she should submit written explanation to the oral questionnaire by 23 -10 -2007. Thereafter, on 06 -11 -2007, the petitioner/accused issued a memo calling for the explanation of the respondent/complainant. On 10 -11 -2007, she was transferred from that Branch and she filed a Writ Petition in the High Court and obtained interim orders. When the orders were shown to the petitioner/accused, he did not allow her to perform the duties on the ground that the copy of the order has not been received and thereafter, when the copy was received, the petitioner/accused warned the respondent/complainant to behave properly in the Office. It is further contended that she was served with the charge sheet and she appeared before the Enquiry Officer on 23 -01 -2008. Certain documents were furnished to her by the Enquiry Officer and one of the documents was a letter, dated 22 -10 -2007 written by the petitioner/accused which contains the defamatory imputations against the 1st respondent/complainant. In the said letter, the petitioner/accused stated that the 1st respondent/complainant is argumentative, negative, litigant, provocative, egoistic, psychic and character assassination type of woman. The petitioner/accused further stated in the said letter that the 1st respondent/complainant is creating tense working atmosphere in the Branch and all the staff members are working under pressure because of her fighting/criminal/cruel mentality. According to the complainant, these imputations were defamatory and hence the complaint is filed."
(3.) AFTER recording the sworn statement of the complainant and two other witnesses by names Jaldi Ishmael Babu, S/o. Prabhudas and Srinivasulu Ram Kumar s/o. S. Janakiram, the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the private complaint and issued summons to the petitioner/accused.;