AMARESHWAR SAHAY,J. - (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE petitioner was made an accused in complaint case No. 352 of 2004 which was filed by opposite party No. 2 Shivnath Choubey before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad alleging the commission of the offence by the petitioner under Sections 406, 409, 467, 408 and 471/120 -B of the Indian Penal Code. In the complaint petition it was alleged that the accused Bharat Modi, who was the Principal and Incharge of DAV High School, DAV + 2 High School, DAV + 2 Kanya High School and DAV Mahila College at Katrasgarh and he was having financial control over the said Institutions. It was further alleged that the accused Bharat Modi misapporpirated lakhs of rupees of the said Institutions by committing forgery.
(3.) ON receipt of the complaint petition, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, under the provisions of Section 192(1), Cr PC transferred the complaint to the Court of Sri R.K. Singh, Judicial Magistrate for enquiry and disposal in accordance with law. It appears that during enquiry under Section 202, Cr PC five witnesses were examined. The learned transferee Magistrate by order dated 19.08.2004 dismissed the complaint holding that the complainant was to prove by documentary evidence, regarding financial control over the said Institutions and it transpires to him from the judicial records that the complainant failed to produce even a single document in support of his case. It was further held by the learned Magistrate that the complainant filed enquiry report of Sita Ram Khaitan against the accused but he did not examine the said Sita Ram Khaitan, who submitted the said enquiry report.;