HARISH CHANDRA MISHRA, J. - (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for theState as also learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. This application has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the entire criminal proceeding against him in complaint case no. 480 of 1999, pending in the Court of Shri A.L.Yadav, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Dhanbad, as also the order dated 12.8.1999 passed therein, whereby upon an enquiry in the complaint case, prima facie case was found against the petitioner for the offence under Sections 323, 341, 379 and 426 of the Indian Penal Code and the process was ordered to be issued.
(2.) IT appears that the complaint case no. 480 of 1999 was filed by thecomplainant -Opposite Party no.2 against the petitioner and one Shri C.K.Singh, stating therein that the petitioner was functioning as a Manager of the State Bank of India, Sindri Branch, at the relevant time, when the complainant was providing generator service on contract basis to the said branch of the Bank for the last ten years. It is alleged that when the petitioner took over the charge as the Manager of the Bank, he terminated the contract of the complainant pre -maturely in December 1998 though the contract was valid up -to March 1999. Thereafter, there is allegation that a fresh tender was issued in which the complainant had also participated. It is alleged that due to manipulation in tender in connivance with the accused no.2., the complainant was deprived in getting the fresh tender. However, for the said action, the complainant had filed a title suit in the Court of Munsif, 1st class, Dhanbad which was registered as Title Suit No. 1 of 1999. It is alleged in the complaint petition that on 2.2.1999 the accused persons along -with 6 -7 persons of armed with 'lathi', chain etc. came to the generator room and started removing the generator set, snapping the connecting wires etc and smashing costly items. It is also alleged that the complainant was assaulted by fists and slaps by the accused persons and the change -over switch as well as meter belonging to the complainant were taken away. With these allegations, the complaint petition was filed in the Court below on 23.4.1999. The statement of the complainant was recorded on S.A and three witnesses were examined in the enquiry stage, on the basis of which, the Court below found prima facie case under Sections 323, 341, 379 and 426 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner by order dated 12.8.1999 and ordered for issuance of process against the petitioner, which has been assailed in the present application. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the case had been instituted by the complainant only with a malafide intention and oblique motive for wreacking vengeance against the petitioner as the contract of the complainant was terminated by the petitioner. It is further submitted that the complainant had also filed an application in the Court below for withdrawing the said complaint petition as the matter had already been settled.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the Opposite Party no.2 has also admitted that a withdrawal petition was filed by the complainant in the Court below for withdrawing the complaint petition, but no order could be passed due to the stay order passed in this application.;