JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Paavan Awasthi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Tilak Raj Singh, the learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 3219 of 2018 (Satya Prakash Singh Vs. Vijay Kumar Banka and Others), under Sections 406, 420 I.P.C., pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow, with a further prayer to stay the operation and implementation of the order dated 25.03.2022 passed in the aforesaid complaint case.

3. The facts of the case are that Satya Prakash Singh, the complainant filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before C.J.M. Lucknow making allegation that he was looking for a plot in Lucknow measuring an area of 100 sq. ft. and in that regard he met the applicant along with his associates Rajendra Prasad Chaudhary, Pawan Kumar Sharma, Suddhakar Singh and Raghvendra Singh. The complainant mentioned in the application that he was shown a plot in Tiwari Ganj and was informed that the cost of the plot is Rs.4,50,000/- plus registry expenses and that half of the total amount is required to be deposited in cash and remaining half to be paid as per the convenience of the complainant. It is stated in the complainant that he deposited Rs.2,00,000/- in cash with the applicant and sought 15 days' time to pay the remaining amount. Thereafter, the complainant was contacted by the applicant prior to 15 days' and he was asked to deposit the remaining amount within four days with an instruction that in case of non-payment of remaining amount within four days, the applicants will sell the plot to some other person/customer. The complainant enquired about the plot situate in Tiwari Ganj and he was informed that the plot which was shown to the complainant was not belonging to the applicant, namely, Vijay Kumar Banka.

4. The complainant requested the applicants to refund the amount already deposited by him but the applicant and his associates visited the house of the complainant and offered him another plot situate at different location. As per the complaint, the complainant rejected their offer and asked them to refund the advance of Rs.2,00,000/- paid by him. The applicant and his associates gave assurance to refund the amount and therefore many times the complainant requested to refund the amount on phone but the amount was not refunded back.

5. Fueling the apathy of the complainant that even on repeated request the money was not refunded to him and one day the petitioner and his associates came to the house of the complainant with weapons, abused the complainant and threatened him to kill and refused to refund the money. It is also mentioned in the complaint that the complainant made a report to the concerned police station but his report was not lodged. Thereafter, he also made a complaint to Superintendent of Police, Lucknow but that too in vain. The application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was treated as complaint.

6. The statement of the complainant was recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and he supported the version of the complaint. The statements of Purnamasi Sharma & Mr. Brajendra Kumar, the witnesses of the case, were recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C. They also supported the statements of fact narrated by the complainant.

7. On the basis of the statement of the complainant recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C., the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow passed the impugned order on 25.03.2022, by which the applicant has been summoned under Sections 406, 420 I.P.C. which is being challenged by the applicant in the present application.

8. Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the entire allegation is completely vague and fictitious and no offence as such is made out against the applicant. Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the false and concocted complainant has been filed just to harass and blackmail the applicant and that too after a delay of more than eight years. Counsel for the applic