- (1.) The present petitioners along with others were arraigned as accused in connection with Malbazar Police Station Case No.118 of 1998 and after completion of investigation police submitted charge-sheet under sections 406/409/418/420/477A/ 120B/109 of the Indian Penal Code against them. When the petitioners moved the trial Court for their discharge, however the trial Court rejected their prayer for discharge and framed charge against them for the self-same offence for which they were charge-sheeted.
(2.) The order rejecting the prayer for discharge and the order of framing of charge are the subject matter of challenge in the instant criminal revision.
(3.) Mr. Sudipto Moitra, the learned counsel in support of this application urged the following points; (a) No prima/arte case of the alleged offences for which charge has been framed has been made out (b) There was neither any entrustment nor any dishonest misappropriation of property by the petitioners. (c) The dispute if any is civil In nature and arising out of a contract of excavation and at best amounts to a breach of contract. (d) There is an arbitration clause contained in the agreement pursuant to which the excavation works was undertaken. (e) Before filing of the FIR the complainant took recourse to the arbitration proceedings, however the award was in favour of the petitioners. (f) The subject matter of the criminal case as well as the arbitration proceedings are identical. (g) The FIR was lodged nearly one month after the complainant referred the dispute for arbitration. (h) The charge-sheet has been submitted two months after the award of arbitration was decreed.;