JUDGMENT :

Subhendu Samanta, J.

1. This is an application u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of a complaint case being no. C60989 of 2016 u/s 120B/420/418/406 of IPC arising out of Shakespeare Sarani Police Station case no. 295 dated 4th November 2011(GR no. 3888 of 2011) pending before the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate 16th Court Calcutta.

2. The brief fact of the case is that opposite party no. 2 (Company) wanted to purchase a landed property belonged to the petitioner’s company. Finally they agreed to each other, the value of the property was fixed to Rs. 4.60 Crores. The OP Company paid the amount of Rs 10 Lakh as advance. There were several correspondence between the parties regarding the taking over the company of the petitioner by the OP no. 2. Ultimately it was not materialised and the petitioner company sale out the landed property in question to other third party. The OP no. 2 filed a civil suit before the appropriate court for specific performance and injunction. OP no. 2 also filed a petition of complaint u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the Concerned Magistrate alleging thereby against the petitioners for commission of offence punishable u/s 420/406/34 of IPC. the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate sent the said petition to the Officer in charge Shakespeare Sarani Police Station to cause an investigation by treating the complaint petition as FIR. Accordingly Shakespeare Sarani Police Station Case no. 295 dated 04.11.2011 was started against the present petitioners. After investigation, the IO submitted charge sheet in the form of final report with a view that the investigation revealed the matter is civil dispute cropped between the two groups of company over the issue of transfer of directorship in respect of one property. The complainant has already taken shelter of the Civil Court for enforcing injunction upon the property. In course of investigation of valued opinion of Chief Public Prosecutor was obtained, he opined to close the investigation declaring the case as civil in nature. Thus final report was filed.

3. The de-facto-complainant/ opposite party no 2 filed one Naraji petition before the Learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Calcutta praying for not accepting the final report. On hearing, the Learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has been pleased to find that it is not a fit case to sent the same before the Shakespeare Sarani Police Station to investigate, thus, he accepted the final report as true and after perusing the Naraji petition. He ordered to treat the Naraji petition as complaint. Accordingly as per direction concerned office was registered the complaint case No.-C60989 of 2016.

4. Hence this revision.

5. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the allegations made in the petition of complaint is absolutely false and fabricated. The dispute and differences between the parties are civil in nature for which the de facto complainant had already approached the Civil Court for proper redress. It is the further argument of the Learned Advocate for the petitioner that the Shakespeare Sarani Police Station investigated the case and submitted final report; after accepting the final report the Learned Magistrate erroneously treated the Naraji Petition to be a petition of complaint which is palpably illegal in the eye of law. The fact of the complaint and investigation thereof when treated as true by the Magistrate, then nothing is left to proceed. Further criminal proceeding against the present petitioner on the selfsame fact would amount an abuse of process of court. The petitioner tried to return the amount of Rs 10 lakh several time once through the post dated cheques and thereafter through RTGS, but the OP no. 2 did not receive the same. The Learned Magistrate mechanically issued the process against the present petitioner erroneously holding the complaint has made a different prima facie case u/s 420/406/34 IPC. The ingredients of the offence punishable u/s 420 IPC has not been made