No cheating absent deception from transaction's inception; mere salary shortfall not offence. Sections 504/506 require provocation for breach of peace or threat of injury with alarm-causing intent – unfulfilled here; proceedings quashed as abuse of process. (32 words)

JUDGMENT :

ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

Heard the parties.

2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with the prayer to quash the order dated 05.12.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Giridih whereby and where under the learned Judicial Magistrate has found prima facie case for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is the Principal of B.N.S.D.A.V Teachers’ Training College, Sirsiya, Giridih. The complainant was selected as a Lecturer in the said college at the monthly salary of Rs.35,500/- but after joining, he was given a lesser amount. He worked in the said college for twenty-seven (27) months but during that period, he was paid Rs.35,000-40,000/- only. He resigned from the college and upon meeting the petitioner, the complainant asked for the money. The petitioner refused to give any money and threatened that he would implicate the complainant in false case. The petitioner, in connivance with one Sunil Kumar Verma submitted a false complaint to the D.G.P. which upon enquiry, was found to be false. On the basis of the complaint, statement of the complainant on solemn affirmation and the statement of the inquiry witnesses, the learned Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence as already indicated above.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that even if entire allegations made against the petitioner are considered to be true still none of the offence in respect of which the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence, is made out against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the case is next fixed to 12.03.2026 for evidence before charge and the charge has not yet been framed. It is also submitted that there is no allegation against the petitioner of playing deception since the very inception of the transaction between the parties and in the absence of the same, the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code is not made out against the petitioner. It is then submitted that in the absence of any allegation of any provocation being given to the complainant to commit breach of peace or any other offence or to create any alarm, the offences punishable under Section 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code is not made. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer, as prayed for in the instant Cr.M.P., be allowed.

5. Learned P. P. appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer of the petitioner made in the instant Cr.M.P. and submit that the materials in the record are sufficient to constitute each of the offences in respect of which the learned Magistrate has found prima facie case. Hence, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed.

6. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that so far as the offence punishable under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, it is a settled principle of law as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Uma Shankar G