A Magistrate has the discretion to direct a police investigation when a complaint discloses a cognizable offence, provided procedural requirements are met. Criminal proceedings should not be quashed if a prima facie case exists and the initiation of the case is not proven to be manifestly malicious.

ORDER :

MITALI THAKURIA, J.

1. Heard Mr. B. Dutta, the learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. S. Deka, the learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State respondent and Mr. D. Baruah, the learned counsel for the respondent no. 2.

2. This is an application u/s 528 read with Section 442 of BNSS, 2023 for quashing of the Charge Sheet No. 154/2024 dated 24.06.2024 u/s 120(B)/200/420/294/506/34 IPC in connection with Dibrugarh P.S. Case No. 93/2023 u/s 120(B)/200/420/294/506/34 IPC corresponding to PRC Case No. 607/2024 pending before the Court of learned JMFC, Dibrugarh and also challenged the impugned order dated 21.01.2023 passed by learned CJM, Dibrugarh in C.R. Case No. 10/2023 directing the complaint filed by the respondent no. 2 to be investigated by O/C, Dibrugarh PS and also challenged the impugned order dated 11.07.2024 passed by learned JMFC, Dibrugarh in PRC Case No. 607/2024 taking cognizance against the petitioners u/s 120(B)/200/420/294/506/34 IPC.

3. The brief facts of the case is that the respondent no. 2, the life members of a Society, namely, Shree Vishwanath Marwari Databya Aushadhalaya, a charitable institution is primarily engaged in providing health care services and undertakings of various philanthropic activities. The petitioners are also engaged in various business activities and are also actively involved in the affairs of the said Society. But, the respondent no. 2 with a malafide intention to malign the reputation of the petitioners, it filed a complaint being C.R. Case No. 10/2023 before the learned CJM, Dibrugarh only with ill intent and personal gain.

4. One Chartered Accountant (CA) Vinay Shah lodged a complaint against the respondent no. 2 who was serving as an Auditor in the said institution wherein it is alleged that the respondent no. 2 had threatened him to alter his Audit Reports concerning the Society and to handover the confidential document pertaining thereto. Under duress, he furnished the confidential documents to the respondent no. 2 and issued a compromised audit opinion in respect of the Society in order to avoid further confrontation. The said complaint was subsequently circulated across various social media platforms by CA Vinay Shah. These petitioners were nether involved in the alleged acts nor named in the said complaint. However, to ensure proper investigation, the petitioner no. 1 being the Secretary of the said Society, addressed a letter to the Officer in Charge of the Dibrugarh Police Station. However, during pendency of the said investigation, the said CA Vinay Shah withdrawn his complaint against the respondent no. 2 for the pressure exercising upon him by the respondent no. 2. Subsequently and rather surprisingly, the respondent no. 2 lodged the instant complaint against the present petitioners alleging that the CA Vinay Shah had acted at their behest and with the circulation of his compliant on various social media platforms had caused reputational harm to him.

5. But, on investigation, the police found no criminality on the part of the petitioners and hence did not initiate any action. Thereafter the respondent no. 2 directly preferred a complaint petition before the learned CJM, Dibrugarh which has been