R.R. Prasad, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel appearing for O.P. No. 2.
(2.) This application has been filed for quashing of the order dated 03/07/2010, passed in Complaint Case bearing C/1 Case No. 4094 of 2009, whereby and where under, cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code, has been taken against the petitioner.
(3.) Mr. Jitendra S. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that it is the case of the complainant that he entered into an agreement with the petitioner's company, whereby certain work was to be executed by the complainant company. On awarding work a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs was taken by the petitioner as security. In course of time the complainant's company got dissolved and, thereby, intimation was given to this petitioner that they shall not be executing work further and, at the same time, claim was also raised that a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs is outstanding, which was demanded, but since, it was not paid to them, the instant case was lodged, though the case of the petitioner is that time to time, payments were made and, thereby, excess payments was made to them than the work executed by him and, thereby, it becomes a case of civil dispute. Learned counsel further submits that the claim and counter claim being there has also been accepted on behalf of O.P. No. 2, which would be evident from the statements made in paragraphs 9, 10 and 11 of the counter affidavit, which strengthen the case of the petitioner that it happens to be the case of civil dispute and, therefore, the Court committed illegality in taking cognizance of the offence.;