1. - The instant miscellaneous petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 9.5.2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sir Ganganagar in Criminal Revision No. 8/2007, affirming the orders dated 20.11.2006 and 4.1.2007 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Karanpur in Criminal Case No. 121/2005 whereby charges. have been framed and read over to the petitioners for the offences under Sections 420, 406 and 120-B, I.P.C.

2. Succinctly stated the facts of the case are that the complainant- respondent No. 2 filed a complaint against the petitioners in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class No. 1, Sri Ganganagar on 5.6.2004 for the offences under Sections 420 and 406 I.PC. The compliant was registered in the Court and inquiry under Sections 200 and 202 Criminal Procedure Code was initiated. The complainant, however, chose not to participate in the proceedings of the complaint and resultantly the complaint was rejected on 4.3.2005.

3. In the meantime, while the aforementioned complaint was still pending, the complainant-respondent No. 2 filed yet another complaint in respect of the same incident and for the same offences in the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri karanpur on 1.11.2004. It is relevant to mention here that in the subsequent complaint, the factum of filing of the earlier complaint in the other Court was concealed by the complainant. Be that as it may, the complaint filed in the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Karanpur was forwarded to the police for investigation and F.I.R. No. 199/2004 was registered at the Police Station, Sri Karanpur on 8.11.2004.

4. The allegation made in the complaint was that the complainant and the accused persons were old acquaintances as being the neighbours. It was further alleged that the petitioners herein induced the complainant and told him that they were having the dealership of a company, namely Modi Petroleum Limited for the district Sri Ganganagar and lured the complainant into accepting the sub-dealership at the tehsil headquarter. The accused allegedly asked the complainant that he would have to make payment of Rupees One lac for being granted the dealership. The complainant further alleged that he fell into the trap Lald by the accused persons and on 19.8.1996 he made payment of Rs. 80,000/- to the accused by a cheque and in addition thereto, he made the payment of cash money of Rs. 12,000/- and Rs. 3900/- respectively for different heads to the accused persons.

5. The accused persons thereafter intimated the complainant that he had been granted the dealership under the name of " Vatan Gas Agency" and that he should arrange for a location for establishing and running the gas agency. On this the complainant alleged that he rented a shop near the Durga Temple at Sri Karanpur and affixed furniture and inaugurated his shop on 1.9.1996. It is alleged that the accused persons promised the complainant that regular supply of gas cylinders would be made and the complainant was also supplied with certain gas cylinders, gas stoves etc. however it is stated that the accused never made a regular supply of filled gas cylinders as promised. A little later when the complainant pressed for supply of filled gas cylinders, the accused allegedly told him that certain problems had developed at the filling plant of the company and, therefore, the accused were finding it difficult to maintain the supply.

6. In the meantime certain news articles came to be published regarding the fraud committed by the petitioners Vijay Kumar Arora and Pawan Kumar Arora in relation to the distribution of the gas agencies to various other persons. The complainant, on reading the news articles, met the accused and requested for being returned back the money deposited by him, but the accused, despite assuring the complainant for returning his money, did not stick to their promise.

7