- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State as also learned counsel for the complainant informant opposite party No. 2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 6.9.1999 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad, in G.R. No. 2223 of 1998, whereby cognizance has been taken against the petitioners for the offence under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners have also prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in the said case.
(2.) It appears from the record that the Complaint Case No. 308 of 1998 was filed by the compliant informant opposite party No. 2 in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad, in which, the petitioners were made accused Nos. 2 to 5, being the partners of M/s. Premier Hard Coke, which was made accused No. 1. There is allegation against the petitioners of making false and dishonest representation, inducing the complainant to become a partner in the said partnership firm, and on such inducement, it is alleged that the complainant paid in the year 1992, in all Rs. 4,35,000/- to the accused persons in different installments. It is alleged that subsequently, the complainant was also inducted in the said firm, but no separate partnership deed was executed, though the complainant had made several requests to the accused persons for the same. It is further alleged that suddenly the business was closed in the month of May 1993, but thereafter the money of the complainant was not refunded back. The complaint petition also shows that the complainant filed a Title Suit No. 75 of 1995 for realization of the money from the petitioners. It is thereafter alleged in the complaint petition that the accused persons dishonestly created the forged documents, i.e., deed of agreement of Managing Agency by forging the signature of the complainant on 8.5.1992 which was attested on 9.5.1992 and General Power of Attorney dated 16.6.1992 and an affidavit sworn by accused No. 2 by forging the signature of the complainant, and knowing full well that the aforesaid documents are forged ones, the same were used by filing before the Electricity Board and also before the Certificate Officer, Dhanbad, with a view to make the complainant solely responsible for all dues of the Government and Electricity Board and also to escape from their liabilities. With these allegations and claiming that thereby the offence is made out under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, the complaint was filed. The said complaint was sent for institution of the police case, on the basis of which, Nirsa P.S. Case No. 130 of 1998 corresponding to G.R. No. 2223 of 1998 was instituted. After investigation, the police submitted charge-sheet in the case and on the basis of charge-sheet and the materials in the case dairy, the cognizance has been taken against the petitioners.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the impugned order as well as the entire criminal proceeding against the petitioners are absolutely illegal and cannot be sustained in the eye of law, inasmuch as, the dispute is of civil nature being arising out of business agreement between the parties. It is also submitted that the complaint petition would itself show that a title suit was also filed by the complainant which also supports the contention that the dispute between the parties is of civil nature. Learned counsel further submits that though there are allegations of forging the signatures of the complainant on some documents, but the said allegations are of the year 1992 itself, but the complaint was filed in the year 1988, without there being any explanation for such a long delay. Learned counsel accordingly, submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and the criminal proceeding as well as the order taking cognizance cannot be sustained in the law.;