This application has been filed for quashing of the order dated 6.11.2012 passed by the then Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in Dhanbad (Bank More) P.S. Case No. 104 of 2012 whereby and whereunder cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioners.

2. A piece of land measuring an area of 73 decimals situated at Dhanbad belonging to the petitioners was mortgaged with the United Bank of India by the petitioners' company known as M/s World Metal Movers. Due to non-payment of the loan advanced in favour of the said company, the Bank moved to Debt Recovery Tribunal for recovery of the outstanding amount due to be paid by the Company. The property was to be auction sold. At that point of time, the petitioners, who were under financial constraint, approached to the opposite party no. 2 and offered the said piece of land for its development on a condition of payment of Rs. 55 lacs to the petitioners so that payment be made to the Bank and the property be made free from encumbrances. The opposite party no. 2 (complainant) accepted the offer and paid the said amount. Thereupon, the parties entered into a development agreement on 8.8.2007. After execution of the development agreement, possession of the land was handed over to the complainant on 3.4.2008, whereupon construction got started, By the passage of time when the complainant did invest a sum of Rs. 5,21,59,889/-, dispute arose in between the parties. According to the development agreement, original deed pertaining to land was required to be handed over to the opposite party No. 2 for the purpose of putting the property under mortgage so that opposite party no. 2 may get loan from financial institution for completion of the project but the petitioners in spite of repeated request, did not hand over the documents which hampered the progress of the construction work. The dispute resulted into an appointment of Arbitrator. While the matter was pending before the Arbitrator, the petitioners did not only revoke the power of attorney but also cancelled the development agreement and the complainant was asked to hand over the possession of the land. After receiving a letter to that effect when the complainant did approach to the petitioner no. 2 and raised grievance that he has been cheated, he was threatened with dire consequence.

3. Thereupon a complaint bearing C.P. Case No. 154 of 2012 was filed which was sent before the concerned police station for its institution and investigation. Accordingly, Dhanbad (Bank More) P.S. Case No. 104 of 2012 was registered under Sections 406, 420, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. After the case was instituted, the company namely, B.N. Hotels Pvt. Ltd. and the petitioner no. 2 moved to this Court vide W.P.(Cr.) No. 49 of 2012 for quashing of the F.I.R.

5. The ground which had been taken was that accepting the entire allegation to be true, no case is made out of the offences under which case has been registered and thereby the petitioners cannot be fastened with any criminal liability, though there may be civil liability as it is a mere case of breach of promise. However, that plea was not accepted by this Court, as a result of which said writ application was dismissed.

6. It be stated that meanwhile the dispute which had cropped up in between the parties was referred to an Arbitrator whereby an award was given in favour of the complainant.

7. It further appears that after the writ application was dismissed by this Court, petitioner no. 2 moved to the Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide Special Leave to Appeal (Cr.) No.8563 of 2012. When the matter was taken up by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, petitioner no. 2 and the Company agreed to deposit Rs. 6 crore in the arbitration proceeding for getting interim protection but when the said amount was not deposited, the SLR was dismissed. Thereafter an application was filed for modification of the order whereunder case had been dismis