M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) BY this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioners have prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding initiated against them being C -I Case No. 400 of 2003 including the order dated 31.05.2003 whereby cognizance: has been taken for the offence under Section 341/406 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Jamshedpur.
(2.) IT appears that the aforementioned complaint case was filed by the complainant/opposite party No. 2 alleging inter alia that the complainant alongwith his friend Balbir Singh Bhatia purchased two trailers, which was financed by the petitioners on repayment by installments. Complainant alleged to have purchased one more trailer being registration No. AS -01 -OL/5307. The complainant alleged that the he was paying installments as agreed but suddenly without any information the trailer was seized by the petitioners with the help of Musdemen. After getting information, the complainant alleged to have paid entire balance amount to the petitioner and on that condition trailer was released and it was stated by the petitioners that receipt of payment would be sent through Calcutta Branch Office. Other trailer alleged to have also been seized in the manner aforesaid and the said vehicle was also released on payment of balance amount but the receipt was not given. Various other allegations have been made. The Magistrate after examining witnesses took cognizance against the Managing Director and the Branch Manager of the Finance Company. The matter was first taken up on 03.7.2003 when notices were issued by a Bench of this Court and further proceeding in the complaint case was stayed. Again by order -dated 5.8.2004, the opposite party/complainant was allowed two weeks time to file affidavit giving details of the amount he has paid till date. The matter remain pending and was listed on 19.6.2006 and on that date the following was passed: Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the mater of compromise was going in between the parties and by this tie the parties must have entered into a compromise, hut he has not got any definite information to that. Therefore, the case be adjourned for a week so that in the meantime, he may ascertain whether the parties have entered into compromise or not. In view of the submission, let this case be placed under the same heading on 30.6.2006.
(3.) THIS case was again listed on 12.2.2007 and on that date learned Counsel for the opposite parties prayed for further time for filing supplementary affidavit: but till date no supplementary affidavit was filed.;