Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.

All the aforesaid four writ petitions, filed by the respective petitioners arise out of the same first information report (hereinafter referred to as 'FIR'), therefore all of them are being disposed of by a common order.

2. The FIR is based on Complaint Case No. 26195 (C) of 2014, which was filed in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna on 10th April, 2014 and was referred to the police for investigation vide order dated 24th November, 2014.

3. From perusal of the order-sheet of the aforesaid Complaint Case, it would appear that on 10th April, 2014, the case was fixed for hearing on 11th April, 2014. On 11th April, 2014, neither the Complainant nor his lawyer appeared before the court and the case was adjourned to 25th April, 2014 for hearing. On 25th April, 2014, the Complainant filed his attendance as also an application under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C.') wherein he made request to transmit the copy of complaint to the Kotwali Police Station for investigation. On hearing the application of the Complainant, the Court directed the lawyer appearing on behalf of the Complainant to satisfy it on the issue of jurisdiction. Thereafter, the case was fixed on different dates, i.e., 21st May, 2014, 4th June, 2014, 9th June, 2014 and 8th July, 2014, but the Complainant took time on all the aforesaid dates on one pretext or the other. The order-sheet would further indicate that since the court became vacant as the Presiding Officer was transferred, the case was adjourned from one date to another between 19th August, 2014 and 7th November, 2014 on several occasions. Subsequently, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna vide order dated 24th November, 2014 referred the complaint to the Kotwali Police Station in exercise of power conferred under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. for investigation pursuant to which Kotwali P.S. Case No. 27 of 2015 was registered on 12th June, 2015 under Sections 420, 406 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') and investigation was taken up.

4. The complaint was filed by one Santosh Kumar, Assistant Manager of Inductus Consultants (P) Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'Complainant'), which deals in providing manpower to various companies and carries out the works relating to form scanning and data entry of various other companies through their specialised trained staffs and for that the Complainant on such orders and requisitions enters into agreement for carrying out such work on charging fixed rates as agreeable in between the parties under the agreement.

5. It is alleged that the accused Smaarftech Technologies (Private) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'Company') is also an incorporated company under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 having its registered Head Office at Mumbai, but has a Branch Office at 403, Fourth Floor, Vashudhara Metro Maul, Boring Canal Road, Patna. The accused Company is engaged in the business of providing technology, infrastructure management services and application software services. At the relevant time, petitioners, namely, Mr. Annand Sarnaaik was Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Mr. Vijay L. Sonawane was Assistant Manager and Mr. Amit Jaste was Director of the said Company. It is alleged that the aforesaid three petitioners approached the officials of the Complainant and presented that the Company has been awarded the project from the Government of Bihar for managing and maintaining technology infrastructure for issue of smart cards and other related aspects for rural masses to be employed under the NREGS Project. Since the Company is executing the said order, therefore, they requested the Complainant to carry out the part of the work on behalf of the Company on payment of requisite charges. After due negotiation and consultation, an agreement was reached and subsequently executed in between the Complainant and the Company on 23rd May, 2011.

6. According to the said ag