JUDGMENT :

Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.:

1. The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of the proceedings being C.R. Case No. 865 of 2019, under Sections 452/327/341/323/382/354/467/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code, presently pending before the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court at Durgapur.

2. The petitioners’ case is that a Partnership Firm under the name and style of M/s. J.B. Steel, having office at Village Kanksa Mollapara, Panagrah, P.O. Panagarh Bazar, PIN – 713148 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Firm”), through its constituents, approached Bank of Baroda, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of undertaking) Act, 1970, having its head office at the Mandvi, Baroda and carrying on banking business amongst other places at its branch at Panagarh, Panagarh Bazar (rail par), opposite Agragami Club, Panagarh, P.S. Kanksa, Paschim Burdwan, West Bengal, PIN – 713 148 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Bank”) for financial assistance and upon execution of various documents, declaration and undertakings, the said Bank of Baroda had granted a Cash Credit facility in favour of the said M/s. J.B. Steel with a limit of Rs.20,00,000/-(Rupees Twenty Lac) only, by way of a Sanction Letter dated 30.05.2013.

3. That in order to secure the said credit facilities one Noor Hossain Sekh alias Sk. Noor Hossain, residing at Kanksa, Molla Para, Paschim Burdwan, PIN – 713148, stood as Guarantor to the said credit facilities obtained by the said Firm and had created a valid equitable mortgage of all that property lying and situated at Mollarparar, near Mohammadam Sporting Club at Plot No. 244, Khatian No. 170/HAL, Khatian No. 404, Mouza Debipur, P.S. Kanksa Sub-Division Durgapur, District Burdwan, PIN – 713148, having a total area of 04 decimals, in the name of Noor Hossain Sekh alias Sk. Noor Hossain.

4. Further in acknowledgment of the liability to pay the dues of the said Bank, the said Firm through its constituents executed several documents, declarations, undertakings, agreements, etc. including the letter of confirmation of mortgage on several dates thereby indicating their acknowledgment and acceptance of the terms and conditions as will appear from various documents.

5. With passage of time, the said credit facilities were classified as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 30.06.2016 as the said Firm failed and/or neglected to pay the legitimate dues of the Bank.

6. Being left with no other alternative the Bank was constrained to initiate SARFAESI Act proceedings against the said Firm in respect of the secured assets, and in discharge of its statutory obligations under the SARFAESI Act initiated a notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act on 31.05.2017 and a notice under Section 13(4) of SARFAESI Act on 13.12.2017 upon compliance of all relevant provisions as enshrined in the said SARFAESI Act. The said Firm through its Learned Advocate replied to the notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act on 18.12.2017.

7. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the SARFAESI action of the said Bank, the said firm through its constituents filed an application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act before the Learned DRT, Kolkata and the same is presently pending for adjudication.

8. Thereafter in order to take physical possession of the secured asset, the Bank filed an application before the Learned Additional District Magistrate, Paschim Burdwan under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act which was duly disposed of on 19.09.2019 and duly communicated to Sub Divisional Magistrate at Durgapur on 26.09.2019 vide Memo No.289/RM/DM/XVI.

9. All of a sudden the petitioners received a bolt from the blue when they were served with the summons of the instant case where the complainant being the wife of the Guarantor, filed a false, fabricated criminal complaint against the instant petitioners.

10. The petitioners further put on record that the petitioners are no way connected with the allegations as alleged