Asim Kumar Roy, J. - (1.) Invoking inherent jurisdiction under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has sought for quashing of the complaint Case No. C/480 of 2007 under Ss. 193/196/197/198/120B of the Indian Penal Code now pending before the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Sealdah as well as the order of issuance of summons.
(2.) It may be mentioned the aforesaid complaint case was filed as against the present petitioner Sri Arup Chatterjee describing him as the accused No. 1 as well as against one Mriganka Khan describing him as the accused No. 2.
(3.) The allegations made in the impugned complaint are as follows; (a) The complainant filed an application under Sec. 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure claiming maintenance from the accused No. 1. The said application being filed before the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sealdah, the Misc. Case No. 120 of 2003 was registered and subsequently the case was transferred to the Court of the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Sealdah for disposal. (b) The complainant in his aforesaid application categorically stated that the accused No. 1 was working in a software company at Bangalore and subsequently she came to know that he took an employment at M/s. IBM at Salt Lake. Whereas the accused No. 1 in his show cause filed in connection with the aforesaid maintenance case stated that he was working in M/s. Simmex Infotech belonging to the accused No. 2. (c) In connection with the aforesaid maintenance proceeding the accused No. 1 was examined in Court on November 16, 2005 and November 18, 2005 and while disposing on oath in Court he stated that he is an employee of the accused No. 2 knowing fully well that his statement is false. (d) The accused No. 1 entered into a criminal conspiracy with the accused No. 2 for their wrongful gain. The accused No. 2 is the best friend of the accused No. 1. While the accused No. 1 stated in his deposition on oath that the accused No. 2 is his employer, the accused No. 2 stated in his deposition on oath that the accused No. 1 is his employee working at his office since July, 2005 which is absolutely false. (e) One Mr. Debasish Chakraborty, Manager of IBM India Ltd. deposed in the aforesaid case as P.W. 4 and in his deposition he stated that the accused No. 1 was the employee of his company since April 4, 2005 and submitted an authenticated document in respect of his employment and his salary, which were duly marked as exhibits. (f) Both the accused Nos. 1 and 2 entered into a criminal conspiracy in between themselves and made false statement on oath before the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Sealdah while deposing in connection with Misc. Case No. 120/2003 knowing fully well that their statement are totally false. (g) The accused persons fabricated and manufactured false evidence in the aforesaid maintenance proceedings and thereby both of them committed offence punishable under Sec. 120B/192/193 of the Indian Penal Code.;