- (1.) HEARD learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the complainant.
(2.) THIS application has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint case bearing C/1 No.1329 of 2011 including the order dated 4.6.2011 whereby and whereunder the then Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Jamshedpur took cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 468 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners and other accused persons. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the complainant on being financed by Magma Fincorp Limited to which petitioners are the Managing Director and Authorized Representative purchased a truck, bearing registration no.JH-05W-4410. When the complainant failed to pay its premium, vehicle was repossessed on behalf of the Finance Company on 30.7.2009. On such repossession, a complaint bearing Complaint Case No.1329 of 2011 was filed. Thereupon the matter was referred to the Arbitration and the Arbitrator gave award in favour of the Financer on 31.3.2010. In spite of the award being passed in favour of the Finance Company when the payment was not made, the Finance Company lodged a complaint case bearing Complaint Case No.34471 of 2010 on 22.11.2010 for the commission of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881. Only then, this complainant lodged compliant case on 21.4.2011 putting all the allegations which were there in the complaint bearing Complaint Case No.4041 of 2009 with certain addition wherein it was alleged that four blank cheques given at the time of purchase of the vehicle were utilized by putting the amount over it, though the complainant had made request to return the same. On such allegation, cognizance of the offence was taken under Sections 406, 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code against these petitioners, vide order dated 4.6.2011. That order is under challenge. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that from the fact stated above, it is clear that whatever allegations have been levelled in the complaint petition, all those allegations are actuated with malice as one complaint had been lodged by the Company against the complainant for the commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act which fact the complaint admits in her complaint petition itself.
(3.) FURTHER, it has been alleged in the complaint that the petitioners are putting the complainant under threat that they will be executing the award passed in their favour which makes it clear that the instant prosecution is malicious prosecution. As against this, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 submitted that whatever statement has been made with respect to passing of award in favour of the petitioners, all are incorrect and that, in fact, the complainant had deposited four blank cheques with the financer at the time of purchase of the vehicle and when the vehicle was repossessed by the financer, the complainant made request to return all those cheques but the petitioners instead of returning all those cheques got two cheques utilized that the petitioners did fill up the amount of the blank cheques and got it deposited in the Bank which got dishonoured.;