The court has the inherent power to quash criminal proceedings where the allegations do not constitute a cognizable offense or where the police have not conducted a proper investigation.

Basudeva Panigrahi, J.

This application has been filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of the proceedings in Gr. No. 240/99 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sealdah, South 24-Parganas arising out of Maniktala Police Station Case No. 20/99 dated 2.2.99, under section 420/120B of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The scaletal picture of the prosecution story is as follows:

The petitioners are the directors of M/s. Shree Hanuman Foundry and Engineering Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'M/s. Hanuman'). The Company has been engaged for manufacturing CI Casting and other products from pig iron and holds considerable good reputation in the market. That M/s. Hanuman was allegedly approached by the de facto complainant herein namely Mr. Rabindra Singh, Managing Director of M/s. ISC Magnetics (P) Ltd. The Managing Director of ISC proposed to M/s. Hanuman that the defacto complainant company was willing to supply the said company with pig iron at long credits spreading over within six to nine months. It had further agreed that the credit limit might be up to 1.5 crores.

3. The M/s. ISC Magnetics Private Limited started supplying pig irons to M/s. Hanuman on and from 22nd October, 1996 and M/s. Hanuman used to pay to M/s. ISC within the said credit limit through cheques and on some occasions by pay orders. The petitioners M/s. Hanuman have, however, claimed that the substantial part of the amount has already been paid leaving only a small amount.

4. The private respondent Rabindra Singh, Managing Director of M/s. ISC filed an application under section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sealdah. Seeking direction from the learned Magistrate to the respective police station for taking appropriate action under section 156(3) Cr. P.C.

5. It has appeared that the learned Magistrate upon receipt of the said application issued a direction to Maniktala P.S. to start investigation on the matter after treating the petition as First Information Report under section 156(3) of Cr. P.C. Pursuant to the said order, the P.S. case No. 20, dated 2.2.99 under section 420/120B was registered for investigation.

6. The private respondent had levelled serious allegations against the petitioners that although a cheque was issued by the petitioners in their 'Vaisya Bank' account but the said cheque was bounced and dishonoured on account of "closure of account" and "not arranged for." The petitioner, therefore, has filed this case for quashing the criminal proceeding on the ground that it being a commercial dispute, the said Court is not the appropriate authority to adjudicate upon the same.

7. In course of investigation it appears that there was a proposal for settling of their differences at the meditation of officer-in-charge, Midnapore Police Station but, however, the matter could not be subsided as the respondent did not come to terms.

8. Mr. Sekhar Basu, the learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioners has argued with great intensity of conviction that the prosecution is unsustainable in law since it is a commercial dispute and it should have been filed before the appropriate court for consideration. It has been further contended that M/s. ISC first approached the police for taking appropriate action against the petitioners but the police did not incline to register a case without specific orders of the learned Magistrate. Therefore, it should be inferred that there was no prima facie case established by M/s. ISC against the petitioners. It has been further submitted that the petitioner even on perusal of the complaint filed before the learned Magistrate, it is seen that no cognizable offence has been made out. Therefore, in the above situation the direction of the learned Magistrate to the police for initiation of the proceeding is an abuse of process of the court. The case has been initiated against these petitioners with mala fide intentio