The petitioners have approached this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the order dated 6.1.2006 passed by the court of Sri Manoj Kumar No.2, Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Patna, in Complaint Case No.2854(C) of 2005, summoning the four accused, named in the complaint petition, including the petitioners under Section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, on inquiry, finding prima facie case under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. In brief, the facts, leading to this application, are that the complainant-opposite party no.2, Ahmar Jawed, filed the complaint case, numbered as Complaint Case No.2854(C) of 2005, against the four accused, named in the complaint petition, including the petitioners with the contention that he is the proprietor of the Company, Rushi International, situated at Patna in Shaheen Palace, Samanpura, Raja Bazar, P.S. Shastri Nagar, District-Patna. He established the Company for the product of Homeopathic Medicines viz. HE-5000, KEEP IT UP, SHE-1000 and other medicines. The complainant-opposite party no.2, for the sale of the products, approached the accused nos.3 and 4, namely, Lalit Wahi and Vikash Wahi, the staffs of Advel Advertising, 14/8, Classic House, Doctor’s Lane, Gole Market, New Delhi, and deposited the cash of Rs.10,77,384/- under proper receipt since April, 2003 to 5.9.2005 in their office for the advertisement of only two medicines, i.e., HE-5000 and SHE-1000. After depositing the said amount, the accused nos.3 and 4, namely, Lalit Wahi and Vikash Wahi respectively released the advertisement of the products of the medicines, i.e., HE-5000 and SHE-1000 but advertisement was never released in respect to Medicine “KEEP IT UP”. All of sudden, the accused persons sent the information regarding suspension of Advertisement vide Letter No.F/221 dated 26.8.2005 to the complainant-opposite party no.2 to the effect that the Company has not clear the dues of advertisement agency. After receiving the suspension letter regarding advertisement, the complainant-opposite party no.2 visited the office of the Advertising Agency, Gole Market, New Delhi, to know the reason for banning the advertisement of his products but the accused nos.3 and 4, Lalit Wahi and Vikash Wahi, did not listen his grievance, nor they disclosed any reason to suspend the advertisement of the medicines. The complainant-opposite party no.2 asked for the statement of the bills to the accused nos.3 and 4, Lalit Wahi and Vikash Wahi, since April, 2003 to July, 2005 but they did not pay attention. Thereafter, the complainant-opposite party no.2 submitted representation before the accused no.1, Deepak S. Raja (petitioner no.2) and accused no.2, Mrs. Annie Joseph (petitioner no.1) on 12.9.2005 asking them to submit necessary documents and the photo copies of the bills of the advertisement and the statement of the payment but they also did not provide the bills of dues, nor submitted any statement regarding the amount as paid by the complainant-opposite party no.2. The further case of the complainant-opposite party no.2 is that the accused persons only made advertisement of the medicines for Rs.9,85,965/-, whereas Rs.10,77,384/- was given to them for the advertisement. Thus, Rs.99,419/- is due against the accused persons. It is further alleged that the accused persons cunningly and dishonestly put embargo on the company of the complainant-opposite party no.2, so that his company will not be able to give a single advertisement in any newspaper throughout the India. As such, the accused persons have cheated the complainant-opposite party no.2 and also misappropriated his money advanced for advertisement and also harm the reputation of the complainant-opposite party no.2.

3. On inquiry, under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the court of Sri Manoj Kumar No.2, Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Patna, summoned the four accused, named in the complaint petition, including the petitio