Cognizance under IPC Section 420 can be upheld with sufficient prima facie evidence; inherent powers to quash should be exercised cautiously without delving into merits prematurely.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. P.J. Saikia, the learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Ms. M. Kechii, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. L.K. Borah, the learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Chandan Prasad Mahato impugning the order dated 21.12.2017, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup(M), Guwahati in C.R. Case No. 634^c/2016, whereby the said Court took cognizance of offence under Section 420 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 against the present petitioner and issued processes to him.

3. The facts relevant for consideration of the instant criminal petition, in brief, are that:-

i. The present respondent, namely, Dharma Prakash Shah had filed a complaint before the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup(M), Guwahati against the present petitioner and one Shashank Shekhar, alleging commission of offence under Sections 120(B)/ 420/406/32 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860.

ii. In the said complaint, it was alleged that the complainant was approached by the present petitioner and one Shashank Shekhar in the month of January, 2016 and he was given an assurance that they can manage job for the complainant (present respondent) in the Steel Authority of India (SAIL), as the father of the accused No. 1 Shashank Shekhar is working in a high administrative post in the Steel Authority of India (SAIL).

iii. It is also alleged in the complaint that the accused persons asked the respondent (complainant) that if he pays Rs. 5,00,000/-(Rupees Five Lakhs only) then they will be in position to offer a prestigious job in the company through the father of the accused No.1.

iv. Believing the assurance given by the accused persons, the respondent somehow managed to collect an amount of Rs. 4,50,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs and Fifty Thousand only) and paid the said amount to the accused Shashank Shekhar on 09.02.2016 at about 6:00 PM. The said accused duly received the amount from the complainant (respondent) and acknowledged the receipt of the same by issuing assurance letter-cum-money receipt on 09.02.2016 with a promise to provide a guaranteed permanent full time job in the Steel Authority of India(SAIL).

v. It is also alleged that the accused No. 1, even assured to refund the said money, along with an interest of 10% per month, in the event he fails to provide job to the respondent.

4. Mr. P.J. Saikia, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Trial Court took cognizance of the offence under Sections 406 /420/34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE ,1860 by order dated 02.08.2016, passed in C.R. Case No. 634^c/2016.

5. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present petitioner preferred a criminal petition before this Court, which was registered as Criminal Petition No. 07/2017.

6. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the said criminal petition was allowed, and by order dated 03.08.2017, passed in Criminal Petition No. 07/2017, the order dated 02.08.2016, passed in C.R. Case No. 634^c/2016 was set aside and the Trial Court was directed to reconsider the matter and to pass a fresh order in accordance with law. Thereafter, by the order, which has been impugned in this instant criminal petition, i.e. order dated 21.12.2017, passed in C.R. Case No. 634^c/2016, the Trial Court took cognizance under Section 420 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 against both the accuse