AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J
This petition has been filed for quashing of the order dated 05.09.2012 in connection with C.P.Case No.806 of 2009, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Dhanbad.
The complaint case was filed alleging therein that the complainant was having his Bank Account No.005559 with UCO Bank Mukunda Branch. On 30.3.2009 the complainant went to the Branch for withdrawal of a sum of Rs.10,000/- and after the aforesaid withdrawal he came to know that on 21.01.2008 a sum of Rs.60,000/- was already withdrawn but as a matter of fact he had not withdrawn the same. On knowing that on 21.1.2008 a sum of Rs.60,000/- was withdrawn he enquired from several employees of the bank as to who had withdrawn the said Rs.60,000/- but no satisfactory reply was given to him. Complainant has also given a written complaint to Branch Manager UCO Bank Mukunda Branch but no action was taken. The complainant claims that from his account no.005559 a sum of Rs.60,000/- was withdrawn on 21.01.2008 by cheating by the accused persons in connivance with staff of Bank, cashier and Branch Manager.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that these petitioners were posted as employee of UCO Bank Mukunda Branch at Dhanbad. He submits that the allegations are made that a sum of Rs.60,000/- has been syphoned from the account of the complainant on 21.01.2008 wherein these petitioners were on leave on that day and to buttress his argument, he refers to Annexure-2 series which is the certificate issued by the Bank about the leave of these petitioners. He submits that the entire case is falsely made against the petitioners who happened to be bank employees.
Mr. Mahavir Prasad Sinha, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the O.P.No.2 submits that the learned court has rightly taken cognizance looking into the police report and thereafter has taken cognizance and there is no illegality in the impugned order.
The learned counsel for the respondent State submits that the learned court has taken cognizance pursuant to the complaint filed.
In the impugned order what are the prima facie materials against these petitioners has not been disclosed. The learned court has relied in a report of the office incharge of Baliapur P.S., however, the case was being examined by the learned court as complaint case and there are procedures of proceeding in the complaint case and if the learned court was satisfied with such nature of the case is made out, he was required to pass the order under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for investigation by the police and further what are the materials against these petitioners as has been argued that on that day they were on leave supported by Annexure -2 series, it appears that the impugned order is passed without applying judicial mind.
Accordingly, impugned order dated 05.09.2012 in connection with C.P.Case No.806 of 2009, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Dhanbad is set aside.
The matter is remitted back to the learned court to pass a fresh order in accordance with law on the point of cognizance.
This petition is disposed of accordingly.