D.N. Singh v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.31381 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1204 Year- 2014 Thana -SIWAN COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSIWAN =========================================================== D.N. Singh, Branch Manager, Canara Bank Branch - Siwan, Babunia MOre, Siwan P.S. and District - Siwan .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Santosh Kumar Gupta, Son of Uday Bhan Gupta, Resident of village - Babunia More, P.S. and District - Siwan .... .... Opposite Party/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s :
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 09-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks quashing of the cognizance order dated 10.06.2014 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan in Complaint Case No. 1204 of 2014 thereby taking cognizance against the petitioner for the offence under Sectons 323, 379 and 504 of I.P.C.
3. The short fact giving rise to the case is that complainant is a distributor of Colgate Company in the District of Siwan, he was called by the petitioner, the then Branch Manager of Canara Bank, Siwan, as earlier, complainant had filed a case No. 78 of 2014 before the Consumer Forum for deficiency in service relating to the bank concerned and started abusing and asked him to sign over a
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.31381 of 2014 dt.09-01-2018 2/2 blank sheet of paper stating that he had no dispute with the Branch Manager. The Branch Manager abused and threatened him with dire consequences and also took out some money from his pocket.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was the Branch Manager of Canara Bank at the relevant point of time and the complainant had taken loan from the said bank and when the bank had stopped the loan amount, he had lodged this false case as he was one of the loanee of the bank.
5. Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of record, there is no material to show that maliciously prosecution was launched against the petitioner, moreover it is not the case that allegation do not disclose the offence, so this application stands dismissed.
(Arun Kumar, J) Sujit/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date17.01.2018 Transmission Date 17.01.2018