Shyam Sunder Prasad Singh & Ors vs State Of Bihar & Ors on 22 July, 1980
& (Shyam Sunder Vs. State etc.) Page no. 4 of pages 14
facing trial in that case. Instead of preferring any appeal/revision
against the said summoning order, he has preferred the complainant
case against the petitioners herein. There is not even a iota of word that
the petitioner Shyam Sunder was having any access to the personal
record and accounts of the respondent Hari Om or as to how the cheque
in question could have come in the hands of the present petitioner.
Moreover, there is no evidence on record to suggest that the cheque was
stolen by the petitioner and that it was handed over by the petitioner to
the another petitioner Pawan Saraswat and once this important chain
is missing then the summoning order against the petitioner u/s 379 IPC
is bad in law. Similarly, the complainant miserably failed to make out
any case U/s 465/471 IPC thereby showing that any sort of forgery has
been committed by the petitioner and thus the summoning order
against the petitioner U/s 465/471 IPC is also not made out. Similarly,
so far as the section 182 IPC is concerned, there is absolutely no
evidence adduced by the complainant. Thus, the entire summoning
order is wholly erroneous and as such the same is not sustainable in the
eyes of law. Same is also not a speaking order.