The applicant has preferred the present revision against the order dated 24.9.2010 passed by the Third Additional Judge to the Court of First Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in Criminal Revision No. 203 of 2010 whereby, the revision filed against the order dated 2.3.2010 passed by the learned ACJM, Bhopal in unregistered Criminal Complaint was dismissed.
The facts of the case in short are that, the applicant filed a criminal complaint against the accused Suresh K. Lalwani for offence punsiahble under Sections 420, 120-B, 506 and 294 of I.P.C that, a sum of Rs. 19 lacs were given to the accused and the accused gave him six different cheques for the debts in the month of January 2008 to March 2008. Those cheques were dishonored and thereafter, the complaints were lodged under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. Two cheques, each of Rs. 2,50,000/- were pending for submission in the Bank. However, complaints filed under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act were dismissed. The applicant moved a criminal complaint that cheating was done by the accused and on 30.7.2008 when he asked for the amount then the accused abused him by obscene words and threatened that if he demands the money, he would be killed.
The learned ACJM after considering the evidence adduced under Section 200 and 202 of the Cr.P.C dismissed the complaint vide order dated 2.3.2010 and the revision filed against that order was also dismissed.
After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, it appears that it was a case of civil nature. If the complaints relating to the dishonoring of the cheques were dismissed, then the applicant had no option except to file a civil suit for recovery of the money. No element of cheating was pleaded by the applicant in the case and therefore, both the Courts below have rightly found that, no offence under Section 420 of I.P.C was made out either directly or with the help of Section 120-B of I.P.C against the respondent. The applicant Thakur Das Shewkani (PW1) in his statement did not mention as to why he did not lodge an FIR for the incident dated 30.7.2008 If the money was not paid by the respondent and the complaints relating to section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act were dismissed, then there was no need to the respondent to threaten the applicant and therefore, the trial Court has rightly found that no such incident of threat took place. The applicant did not mention the works spoken by the respondent. Looking to his statement, if some filthy abuses were told by the respondent, then it cannot be said that the respondent uttered obscene words at a public place. Hence, prima facie no offence under Section 294 of I.P.C was made out against the respondent.
On the basis of the aforesaid discussion, there is no reason to accept the present petition filed by the applicant under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C and to interfere in the orders passed by the Courts below.
Consequently, the present petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C filed by the applicant Thakur Das Shewkani is hereby dismissed at motion stage.
Copy of the order be sent to both the Courts below along with their records for information.