The duty of the Magistrate to apply judicial mind before taking cognizance and the application of legal principles to quash a complaint based on absurd and inherently improbable allegations.

1. Petitioner invokes inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 561-A Cr.P.C. seeking quashment of the complaint dated 23.01.2016 filed by respondent No.1, Sunny Sharma, and summoning order thereof passed by learned City Judge, Jammu, in criminal complaint No.148/C/2016 under Sections 341, 323 and 506 RPC.

2. In the petition, it is stated that respondent No.1 has filed a false/frivolous and vexatious complaint dated 23.01.2016 in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu and the same complaint has been transferred to the court of learned City Judge, Jammu. It is further stated that the statements of the witnesses were recorded by the learned City Judge, Jammu and after considering the statements along with complaint, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance and summoned the petitioner to face the trial for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 341, 323 and 506 RPC. Respondent No.1 is a business man and is a Managing Director of Transport Company, namely Jhelum Road lines Pvt. Ltd and was having business relationship with petitioner as well as respondent No.2. The petitioner in 2010 joined the branch office of the company of respondent No.1 at Zirakpur, Punjab and was getting salary @ 10,000/- per month. Even after providing services for 5 long years only once the hike of Rs.1,000/- was done in the salary of the petitioner. It is further stated that due to the bona fide efforts of the petitioner along with respondent No.2, the company’s business was established in the State of Punjab. After the business got established and respondent No.1 started earning profits, the petitioner requested respondent No.1 for increasing his salary and also to give provident fund and other benefits to the employees of the company to which the respondent denied. However, it is notably put forth after being disappointed by the repeated denials to the increase the salary of the petitioner by the respondent despite of the fact that the petitioner had established the business of respondent No.1 in the State of Punjab, the petitioner gave the resignation to respondent No.1 on 14.11.2014 which was not accepted by respondent No.1. The petitioner on 02.12.2014 joined another company i.e. Bharat Roadway’s (Regd) firm with its Head office at Udhampur and Branch Office at Zirakpur, Haryana as a loading clerk.

3. It is further contended that respondent No.1 in order to take out personal grudges from the petitioner, filed an application via his father, namely, Sh. Som Nath Sharma with the request to lodge an FIR on 13.12.2014 against the petitioner and respondent No.2 lodged the same in the Police Post Baltana, District S.A.S. Nagar, Punjab which was later on transferred to Police Station Zirakpur. It is further stated that it is clear from the enquiry report submitted by the police station Zirakpur that respondent No.1 was contacted many times for inquiry of the application made against the petitioner and respondent No.2 but respondent No.1 never presented him before the Zirakpur Police authorities even for recording the statements.

4. In the impugned complaint under para nos.3 & 4 false allegations have been leveled by respondent No.1 against the petitioner that the accounts of the firm were settled and the petitioner and respondent no.2 were found misappropriation of amount Rs.14.00 lacs which is against the amount mentioned in the criminal complaint i.e. Rs.15.00 lacs which also reveals that the present complaint is made only to give shape to the personal grudges. It is further alleged that respondent No.2 failed in providing any material evidence on record which is in support of his complaint and the present complaint has been filed with oblique motive with only motive to harass the petitioner and to wreck vengeance on the petitioner with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge and the sole motive behind filing this complaint is to harass the petitioner as the complaint being criminal in nature the