Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. - (1.) In this application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings in connection with C.P. Case No. 359 of 2004 including the order dated 18.10.2004 passed by Shri Uttam Anand, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bokaro whereby and whereunder cognizance has been taken for the offences punishable under Ss. 406, 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
(2.) The prosecution case as would appear from the complaint petition is that pursuant to an advertisement published by the accused persons the complainant has sent Rs. 500/ - towards franchisee application money in favour of the accused No. 1 which was also acknowledged vide receipt dated 08.05.2000. A letter dated 17.06.2000 was sent by the accused No. 10 in which the complainant was communicated about the acceptance of his application. The complainant was subsequently requested to send the agreement duly signed with an earnest money of Rs. 5,000/ - in the form of demand draft which was complied by the complainant. A further letter dated 28.07.2000 was received by the complainant for purchase of equipments required for franchisee network and it was assured that the individual invoices would be sent directly to him. Several letters followed in which the complainant was informed about the intimation to the Bank of India for sanction of loan and it is alleged that the complainant was induced to take loan from Bank of India for franchisee purpose. Installment amounting to Rs. 2,00,000/ - were sent to the petitioner's Company by taking loan from Bank of India, Chas, Branch which was duly acknowledged by the officials of Company. A further amount of Rs. 3600/ - was deposited by the complainant by a bank draft dated 26.07.2001 towards annual maintenance charge per VSAT. It is alleged that the complainant was further directed to send an amount of Rs. 30,000/ - before February, 2002. The Company had floated stock performance on the website in which the growth of the Company was shown to be negative. It has been stated that the complainant had informed the Company about his intention to terminate the franchisee agreement. The complaint petition further alleged that the accused persons dishonestly misappropriated the money of the complainant.
(3.) On the basis of the said allegations referred to above Complaint Case No. 359 of 2004 was instituted in which after conducting an enquiry under Sec. 202 of the Cr.P.C. cognizance was taken by the learned judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bokaro on 18.10.2004 for the offences punishable under Ss. 406, 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.;