Manoj Shrivastava vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

N.K. Gupta, J.—Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The applicant has challenged the order dated 19.6.2007 passed by the learned CJM, Bhopal in an unregistered criminal complaint, whereby an order u/s 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. was passed for registration of an FIR.

The facts of the case, in short, are that, the respondent No. 2 has filed a criminal complaint against the applicant for offence punishable u/s 406/420 and 506 of IPC. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate after perusal of various documents filed by the complainant passed the order dated 19.6.2007, by which the application u/s 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. was accepted.

The learned senior counsel for the applicant has submitted that the entire matter was of civil nature. The applicant has also lodged an FIR against the respondent No. 2 at Jhansi and actually, it was the respondent No. 2, who did cheating with the applicant. The entire transaction took place between the applicant and the respondent No. 2 was of civil nature and therefore, the order dated 19.6.2007 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhopal as well as the entire complaint may be quashed. The learned senior counsel of the applicant has submitted much on the merits of the case and he relied upon the judgment passed by Hon''ble the Apex Court in case of Ajay Mitra Vs. State of M.P. and Others, . It is also submitted that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate did not apply his mind before passing the order u/s 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. There was no document on record by which it can be presumed that the complaint lodged by the complainant was prima facie correct. In this connection, the judgment passed by Hon''ble the Apex Court in case of Maksud Saiyed Vs. State of Gujarat and Others, is referred and therefore, it is prayed that the proceedings of the trial Court may be quashed.

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 has submitted that prima facie case is made out against the applicant. The applicant did not file the list of documents filed alongwith the complaint and copy of such documents filed by the complainant before the trial Court. The trial Court in its order has mentioned that after perusal of the documents and considering the text pleaded in the complaint, directed that an FIR be registered against the applicant and investigation may be done. Consequently, application u/s 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. filed by the respondent No. 2 was accepted and therefore, there is no illegality or perversity in the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhopal. In this connection, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 has referred various judgments passed by Hon''ble the Apex Court in cases of Mohd. Yousuf Vs. Smt. Afaq Jahan and Another, Satyanand and another Vs. Prakash Chand Jain and another, Smt. Mona Panwar Vs. The Hon''ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad and Others, . It is also submitted that at present, investigation is yet to be done by the police and therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said that no crime has been committed by the applicant. The FIR lodged by the applicant against the respondent No. 2 at Jhansi was duly investigated and the respondent No. 2 was discharged in the case. No forgery or cheating is proved against the respondent No. 2.

After considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, at present merits of the case cannot be considered. Since the matter is under investigation, therefore, only after the entire investigation, it could be said that whether the criminal case is made out against the applicant or not and therefore, the complaint pending before the Magisterial Court cannot be quashed at this stage. For that relief, the present petition is pre-mature.

After perusal of the order dated 19.6.2011, it is apparent that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has applied his mind while passing the order u/s 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. He considered the documents filed alongwith the complaint and allegations made in the complaint. He has mentioned the reasons in the order dated 19.6.2007 for passing such an order. After perusal of the complaint (the applicant did not file the documents annexed with the complaint before this Court), looking to the allegations prima facie, a case is made out against the applicant, so that it may be given for investigation and therefore, in the light of judgments passed by Hon''ble the Apex Court in cases of Mona Panwar (supra), Satynanad (supra) and Mohd. Yousuf (supra), no interference is required in the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhopal.

In case of Maksud Saiyed (supra), Hon''ble the Apex Court has observed that in that case mind was not applied by the concerned Magistrate, whereas such situation does not arise in the present case and therefore, being a different situation, results of the case of Maksud Saiyed (supra) cannot be applied in the present case. However, the law laid by Hon''ble the Apex Court is same as it is laid in the aforesaid three cases.

On the basis of the aforesaid discussion, there is no reason by which any interference can be done in the impugned order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhopal. There is no basis by which the present petition u/s 482 of the Cr.P.C. may be accepted. Consequently, it is hereby dismissed.

A copy of the order be sent to the Magisterial Court for information. Since the petition is disposed of finally, therefore, if any interim order has been passed then, it is automatically vacated.