IMPORTANT POINT
A legitimate prosecution cannot be stifled under Section 482 Cr.P.C., and the complainant had locus standi to set the law in motion.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard the parties.

2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Complaint Case No. 2475 of 2018, including the order dated 18.10.2021, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur whereby and where under, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance against the petitioners and other co-accused persons for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468, 471, 120B of Indian Penal Code, now pending in the court learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur.

3. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners in criminal conspiracy with the co-accused persons have committed forgery to receive and deliver money and movable property and have also committed forgery for the purpose of cheating and used forged documents as genuine.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the learned Magistrate has passed the order dated 18.10.2021 without any application of mind in most mechanical manner. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the inquiry witnesses C.W.1 after being expelled from the association for proven misconduct has been spearheading the vicious campaign to malign the reputation of the association and its members by filing false and frivolous cases against the association and its office bearers and the witness is a named accused in a criminal case. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the allegations against the petitioners are false and the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has merely referred to the documents filed by the opposite party no.2- complainant and the said documents does not disclose any offence for which the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has found prima facie case. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioner no.1 is the Secretary of Jharkhand State Cricket Association and the petitioner no.2 is the treasurer of the same and the petitioner no.3 was not holding any post and was only the member of Jharkhand State Cricket Association hence, the petitioner no.3 was not even a party to any decision of the association. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that since the alleged occurrence has taken place at Ranchi, therefore, the complaint at Jamshedpur is not maintainable. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the opposite party no.2- complainant being a stranger cannot be permitted to raise any plea of forgery and other offences having been committed by the petitioners. Relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Mohammed Ibrahim & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Anr. reported in (2009) 8 SCC 751, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that it is a settled principle of law that when a sale deed is executed conveying a property to the purchaser by making false representation of ownership, a stranger cannot set the criminal law in motion and the same analogy can be applied in this case also.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners next relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Karnataka vs. M. Devendrappa & Anr. reported in (2002) 3 SCC 89, paragraph no.8 of which reads as under:-

8. In dealing with the last case, it is important to bear in mind the distinction between a case where there is no legal evidence or where there is evidence which is clearly inconsistent with the accusations made, and a case where there is legal evidence which, on appreciation, may or may not support the accusations. When exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court would not ordinarily embark upon an enquiry whether the evidence in question is reliable or not or whether on a reasonable appreciation of it accusation would not