Applicant has filed this petition under section 482 CrPC for quashing the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 100/2003 pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sagar and/or the order dated 28.1.2003 passed in aforesaid case taking cognizance against the applicant under section 294, 506-II IPC and section 3 (l)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

In brief, facts of the present case are that applicant had entered into a contract with respondent Daulat Prasad for construction of his house. This agreement was entered into on 3.9.1998. There were some disputes about the construction and about the amount of money to be paid to respondent contractor. On 6.2.2002 respondent-complainant filed a private complaint against the applicant on the allegations that because of the dispute in respect of the contract applicant did not pay his money which was outstanding for the construction. When on 16.4.2000, he demanded his money, applicant told him "Ja be Chamara Tera Hisab Ho Chuka Hai Jo Dekhe Kar Lena Is Prakar Jatigat Apman Apsabdo Dwara Karte Hue Anavedak Ne A vedak Se Kaha Tujhe J an Se Khatm Karva Fikwa Dunga. " Aggrieved thereby, he reported the matter to S.P., Harijan Kalyan Cell, Sagar, but, no action was taken. Therefore, he filed the present complaint against the applicant under sections 467, 471, 294, 506-B/34 IPC and section 3 (1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sagar. Respondent-complainant besides himself examined Bablu Chamar PW 2 and Nanha Ahirwal as PW 3 under sections 200 and 202 CrPC.

Learned Magistrate on consideration of the material and the evidence adduced by the complainant on the record, found the complaint to be false and frivolous and dismissed it by order dated 22.10.2002. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, respondent preferred criminal revision before the Sessions Court. Learned revision Court by its order dated 4.12.2002, passed in Criminal Revision No. 207/2002, allowed the revision, set aside the order passed by CJM and remanded the case for fresh consideration.

Learned Magistrate on fresh consideration of the evidence and material on the record, found that the case was of civil nature and because the complainant happened to belong to scheduled caste has exaggerated the allegations. However, in view of the evidence on the record it took cognizance against the applicant for the offence under sections 294, 506-II, IPC and section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and ordered for issuance of bailable warrant against him.

Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of taking cognizance against him, the applicant has come up before this Court for quashing the proceedings of criminal complaint by filing the present petition under section 482 CrPC. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that though under agreement between the parties for construction of the applicant's house the applicant had advanced money to the respondent, yet he had not constructed the house within the stipulated time and had also taken more money than required. There had been some differences in regard to the payment of money and the applicant had filed case before the Consumer Forum against the respondent which is still pending. He submitted that being annoyed by the step taken by the applicant in filing the case before the Consumer Forum, the respondent filed the present complaint on false and frivolous allegations. He further submitted that from the allegations made in the complaint and from the evidence of witnesses, no offence was prima facie made out and cognizance therefore taken by the learned Magistrate was without jurisdiction. He submitted that merely because of the civil dispute exaggerated and false allegations were made by the respondent. He also submitted that on the date of occurrence, applicant was not prese