S.N.PATHAK,J. - (1.) Heard the parties.
(2.) This Cr.M.P. has been filed with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding and order dated 03.09.2015, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Giridih in connection with Dhanwar P.S. Case No. 143 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1374 of 2012.
(3.) The facts of the case in brief is that a complaint petition was filed before the learned C.J.M. Giridih, which was subsequently sent for registration of F.I.R. under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. and on the basis of which an F.I.R. was lodged alleging therein that on 08.09.2009 petitioner and others came to the village of the informant and offered the villagers to install the towers of Asian Net at their lands for which they will get a sum of Rs.1695/- per month as rent and Rs.800/- per month towards maintenance charges to the villagers. The petitioner had demanded a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards security money from the villagers, who are interested in installing the towers of the company at their lands. Eight villagers have accepted the offer and deposited the said security amount with the petitioner. Thereafter, all the eight persons were taken to Bokaro for executing the agreement with the company, where it was assured by the Company that the Asian Net will be installed at their lands within a period of three months. After lapse of three months, when the tower of Asian Net was not installed by the company, all the persons approached the petitioner, who assured them that the Asian Net will be installed within 8 days. It is further alleged that after repeated demands when the Asian Net was not installed by the Company, they demanded for refund of their security money from the petitioner, upon which the petitioner gave separate cheques to all of them and asked them to deposit the same after three months. It has been alleged that the time limit of cheque has been lapsed and when the petitioner came to the village of the informant, they demanded for refund of their money but he denied to refund the same and also abused them. Hence, the informant lodged the instant complaint against the petitioner.;