Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. - (1.) Heard Mr. Pratiush Lala, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, learned A.P.P. No one appears on behalf of O.P. No. 2 in spite of valid service of notice.
(2.) In this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection with C.P. Case No. 501 of 2014, including the order dated 19.12.2014, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad, by which cognizance has been taken for the offence punishable under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
(3.) A complaint case was instituted by the opposite party no. 2, in which it was stated that the complainant was having a family business of supply of building materials and since the petitioner had a construction Firm, the complainant was induced by the petitioner to work with him in the field of construction. It has been stated that a partnership deed was executed in the year 2008 between the petitioner and the complainant for performing construction work in Dhanbad district. Since the petitioner was facing financial difficulties and had earlier taken an investment from the complainant of Rs.94,90,500/-, the petitioner repeatedly induced the complainant to carry on the work at Dhanbad and make investment in the projects of Dhanbad. Further allegation is that an amount of Rs.32400000/-was due from the petitioner which he had acknowledged but later on refused to make payment of any amount to the complainant. Further allegation has been levelled by the complainant that although an assurance was given by the petitioner for clearing the entire dues but the same was never done and subsequently the petitioner refused to pay any amount to the complainant.;