Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. - (1.) Heard Mr. M. K. Laik, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shekhar Sinha, learned A.P.P. for the State. No one appears on behalf of opposite party no. 2 in spite of valid service of notice.
(2.) The petitioner in this application has prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection with C. P. Case No. 62 of 2001 including the order dated 10.04.2001 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st class, Bokaro whereby and whereunder cognizance has been taken for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 341, 379, 426, 484 and 420 of the I.P.C.
(3.) It has been submitted by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the parties were on friendly relationship previously as in the complaint case itself a mention has been made about the transaction which had taken place between the petitioner and the opposite party no. 2. Learned senior counsel further submits that the cheque which was purportedly given to the petitioner was never encashed and therefore no loss has been caused to the complainant. It has been submitted that since the allegation relates to business transaction between the parties, no criminal offence is made out against the petitioner and therefore, the entire criminal proceeding as against the petitioner should be quashed.;