RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, J.

1. Heard learned senior counsel representing the petitioners and learned counsel representing the State as well as private respondents.

2. This criminal writ application has been preferred for quashing the order dated 28th September, 2015 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Danapur, District-Patna, in Complaint Case No. 1145 (C) of 2015 exercising his power under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and also to quash the resultant First Information Report vide Danapur P.S. Case No. 557 of 2015 under Sections 406, 420, 504, 468, 469, 418, 419, 304 and 120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3. Learned senior counsel has centered his argument to the basic contention that a bare reading of the complaint without adding or subtracting anything out of it, the complaint/F.I.R. would not disclose even prima facie the commission of any cognizable offence. His further contention is that the complainant/informant has attempted to give a criminal colour/cloak to a purely civil/commercial dispute, which is the subject matter of an arbitration proceeding between the parties. It is also the submission of the learned senior cou