D.N.UPADHYAY - (1.) IT reveals from the written report that the accused persons have forcibly taken away Rs. 2,49,000/ - from the informant.
(2.) It is submitted that this case has been instituted due to business rivalry. It is admitted in the First Information Report that the petitioners are known to the informant. The recovery made from the house of petitioners does not corroborate the amount looted. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter and the allegation levelled against them, I do not feel inclined to consider the prayer under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the same is dismissed in connection with Tundi P.S. Case No. 31 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No. 1167 of 2012, pending in the Court of Sri Akhilesh Kumar, Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad.;