JUDGMENT :

SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.

1) Present Application is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Cr.P.C.”, for short) seeking to quash and set aside the Order dated 12th February, 2014 passed in R.C.C. No. 1158 of 2013 by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.6, at Nashik and F.I.R. being C.R.No.41 of 2014 dated 27th February, 2014, registered with Ambad Police Station.

1.1) Record of the Application reveals that, Ad-interim relief was granted on 9th June, 2014. The Rule was issued on 13th June, 2016, and the ad-interim relief was continued to operate as interim relief.

2) Heard Ms. Farzana Khan, learned Advocate for the Applicant and Mr. Ajay Patil, learned APP for Respondent No.1-State. Respondent No.2 is duly served. However, none appeared for Respondent No.2, when the matter taken up for final hearing.

3) Respondent No.2 has filed the R.C.C.No.1158/2013 (old S.C.C. No.3680/2012 and hereinafter referred to as ‘the complaint’, for short) wherein it is alleged that, in February 2011, all the seven Accused persons named therein induced Respondent No.2 to invest money in the business of the accused persons namely M/s. Shri Swami Samarth Investment, by giving false assurance that, out of the said investment he would get huge profit. Respondent No.2 fell prey to that assurance and invested total Rs.5,00,000/- in the said business of the Accused. Thereafter, sometime in the month of July 2011, Respondent No.2 asked the accused persons to give him his principal amount and the profit earned thereon by them. The accused persons avoided to return his money and his share in the profit. However, due to persistent demands made by Respondent No.2, in March 2012, Accused No.1 gave a cheque of Rs.14,40,000/- to Respondent No.2 towards the principal amount of Rs.5,00,000/- and the profit of Rs.9,40,000/-. The said cheque was dishonoured when presented for encashment. Respondent No.2, therefore, issued a statutory notice to Accused No.1 but, was in vain. Thereafter, Respondent No.2 demanded his money from the Accused but they refused to pay. Thus, the accused persons in furtherance of their common intention cheated Respondent No.2. Hence, he filed the said complaint.

4) After considering the complaint, initially, the then learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class did not find it necessary to issue directions to the police for investigation and by passing an Order below Exh.1 dated 29th November 2012, the learned Magistrate directed to “put up (the case) for verification”. Accordingly, Respondent No.2 was examined under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. on 1st December, 2012.

4.1) On 14th October, 2013 the subsequent learned Magistrate noted that, “the offence charged against the accused are under Secs.406, 420 etc. of I.P.C., hence, A.S. (Asstt. Superintendent) to register the case as ‘Regular Triable Case’, entry regarding institution register be changed, accordingly”. On 12th February, 2014, the learned Magistrate passed the impugned Order, which is as under:

ORDER BELOW EXH. 1

“1. Read the complaint. Perused the documents placed on record. It appears that, the complaint pertains to commission of serious and cognizable offence. It requires to be investigated by Police as per the guidelines in the case of Panchabhai vs. State of Maharashtra, Reported in 2010 (1) MLJ 421.

2. Therefore, P.I. Ambad Police Station is directed to register F.I.R. against Accused and carry out the investigation and submit his report as per Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C.

3. Certified copy of the complaint be sent to Ambad Police Station for investigation for that purpose. Complainant is directed to file certified copies of complaint and documents filed with”.

s/d (Eng.)

(name)

Judicial Magistrate, First Class,

Court No.6, Nashik

4.2 Hence, the impugned F.I.R. being C.R. No.41 of 2014, came to be registered.

Submissions :

5) Learned Advocate for the Applicant submitted that, undisputedly, the erstwhile learned Magistrate had decided to examine the Respondent