The main legal point established is that for an offense of criminal intimidation under Section 506 of the IPC, the threat must be directed towards causing a person to act illegally, and mere expressions seeking justice or expressing mental stress may not constitute criminal intimidation.

By the Court.-Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State as also learned counsel for OP No.2, who was has appeared upon notice.

2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 12.7.2010 passed by Sri Shwayambhu. learned Judicial Magistrate; 1st Class, Palamau at Daltonganj, in Complaint Case No. 1152 of 2009. whereby the complaint petition filed by the Complainant New India Assurance Company Ltd., has been dismissed by the Court below under Section 203 of the Cr PC. In the said complaint case No. 1152 of 2009, the OP No.2 who was posted as Development Officer in the said Company was made the sole accused.

3. There is aJ1egation against the OP No. 2 to have issued Cover Note with respect to a bus which had met with an accident, without following the rules and norms of the Company for which he was departmentally proceeded and punished. It is alleged in the complaint petition that the accused OP No.2 wrote letters to the Chairman-cum-Managing Director threatening to commit suicide for which the Company was to be responsible. Alleging that the threat given by the accused to commit suicide created an alarming situation in the company and in between its employees and those letters were written by the accused for pressurizing the company and its officers to act in the manner in which the Company was not legally bound to act the complaint petition was filed by the complainant Company in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Palamau at Daltonganj for the alleged offences under Sections 500 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The two letters, which were allegedly written by OP No.2, were also brought on record by the complainant, which showed that the letters were addressed to one Shri Bimlendu Chakroverty, the Chairman-cum-Managing Director (in short the CMD) of the New India Assurance Company Ltd., by the OP No.2, stating that he tried to get justice from the CMD. but as he was not getting justice he and his family members were under mental agony and if no order is passed in his favour he shall be compelled to commit suicide for which the addressee of the letter namely, Bimlendu Chakroverty. CMD of the Company would be solely responsible (Jimmewar aap swaim honge).

"4. It appears that the statement of the Branch Manager of the complainant Company, through whom the complaint petition was filed, was recorded on SA and during enquiry one witness was also examined on the basis of which the Court below by order dated 12.7.2010, dismissed the complaint petition under Section 203 of the Cr PC, finding the no offence was made got against the accused for either of the Section 500 or 506 of the IPC.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order passed by the Court below is absolutely illegal and cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. So far as offence under Section 500, IPC is concerned learned counsel very fairly conceded that in the facts of the case offence under Section 500, IPC was not at all attracted. Learned counsel submitted that the offence is certainly made out against the accused OP No.2 under Section 506. IPC, in as much as, in the letters which have been brought on record, there is a clear threat to the Chairman-cum-Managing Director of the Company to act in a particular manner, otherwise the addressee would be responsible if the OP No. 2 committed suicide. Learned counsel accordingly, submitted that this clearly amounts to criminal intimidation of the Company and makes out the offence under Section 506, IPC. against the OP No.2, Learned counsel accordingly submitted that the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.

6. Learned counsel for the State, as also learned counsel for the OP No.2 on the other hand, submitted that there is no illegality in the impugned order worth interference in the revisional jurisdiction in as much as, after proper enquiry the complaint petition was dismissed under Section 203 of the Cr PC. It has been submitted by the learned