SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(SC) 746

Supreme Court Of India
S.B. Sinha & C.K. Thakker
Asit Bhattacharjee-PETITIONER
Versus
M/s. Hanuman Prasad Ojha & Ors-RESPONDENT
Appeal (crl.) 1534 of 2006
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 15/05/2007

The main legal point established in the judgment is the jurisdiction of the Court, the authority to transfer the investigation of a criminal case, and the need for further investigation by the C.B.C.I.D. of the State of Uttar Pradesh.

Headnote:

Criminal Conspiracy - Jurisdiction - Indian Penal Code - Section 120B/420/406/465/467/468/471 - [The judgment discusses the criminal conspiracy, jurisdiction, and application of Indian Penal Code Sections 120B, 420, 406, 465, 467, 468, 471 in a case involving fraudulent activities and misappropriation of funds.]

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was awarded contracts for exporting wheat and rice and alleged that the respondents committed various acts of breach of trust, cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy. The complaint was filed before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kolkata, and investigations were carried out. The respondents filed a criminal writ petition before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad seeking various reliefs.

Finding of the Court:

The High Court allowed the writ petition in part, directing the transmission of the FIR to the appropriate Police Station of Uttar Pradesh and directing the investigation to be concluded within a specified period. The appellant appealed against this judgment.

Issues: The issues included the jurisdiction of the Court, the effect of sub-section (4) of Section 181 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the authority to transfer the investigation of a criminal case from one statutory authority to another.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate had jurisdiction to entertain the complaint petition under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the High Court should not have interfered with the order taking cognizance passed by the competent court. The Court also emphasized the need for further investigation by the C.B.C.I.D. of the State of Uttar Pradesh.

Final Decision: The Court directed further investigation by the C.B.C.I.D. of the State of Uttar Pradesh, and the accused/respondents were directed to surrender before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad. The Report on completion of the investigation shall be forwarded to the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta, who shall determine the question of his own jurisdiction at an appropriate stage.

JUDGMENT

S.B. Sinha, J.

1.Appellant herein was awarded contracts for exporting wheat, rice etc. upon purchasing the same from Food Corporation of India as also from open market, by the State Trading Corporation of India, Chennai and Kolkata as also West Bengal Essential Commodities Supply Corporation Limited. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein allegedly approached him for appointment as its agent to arrange and supply foodgrains i.e. wheat and rice of the Food Corporation of India and send the same to different destinations in West Bengal on commission basis. Pursuant to or in furtherance of the said agreement, Respondent No. 1 under the direction of Respondent No. 2 used to make arrangement of railway rakes at different railway stations in the State of Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Uttaranchal, Madhya Pradesh and Haryana for export of rice and wheat from Food Corporation of India to Bangladesh for and on behalf of the appellant. Allegedly, in course of rendition such services, respondents committed various acts of breach of trust, cheating, forgery and criminal conspiracy. One of their employees was also assaulted. A complaint petition was filed by the Appellant Company before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kolkata purported to be under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on or about 15.10.2004 inter alia alleging that a criminal conspiracy was entered into by and between accused No. 2 with accused Nos. 3 to 12 with a view to cheat the complainant Company and/or dishonestly misappropriate a huge amount of Rs. 1,62,32,837.00 by making forged and false documents, fraudulently preparing its letter heads and seals and using the same, committed breach of trust and withdrew the refund amount of Rs. 1,55,07,928.00


2.It is not in dispute that the said purported acts were committed outside the State of West Bengal and principally in the State of Uttar Pradesh.

3.The bankers of the appellant company issued a draft of Rs. 1,63,536.00 in favour of District Manager, Food Corporation of India, Sitapur which was also allegedly misappropriated by the concerned respondents.

4.One of the indent receipts out of the 30 indents amounting to Rs. 4,50,000.00 was lost by an employee of the appellant while travelling and the accused No. 6 representing accused Nos. 1 and 2 withdrew the amount in question by using forged indemnity bond and letter head of the Company and, thus, a sum of Rs. 4,50,000.00 was misappropriated by the accused persons. The said offence was also allegedly committed at Iradatgunj in the State of U.P. On behalf of the appellant, accused No. 2 allegedly deposited indent money in respect of 40 indents at Hardoi, out of which also some amount was misappropriated by the accused persons.

Hardoi is also in the State of Uttar Pradesh. Demand draft issued by the bankers of the appellant viz. Union Bank of India and Punjab National Bank in favour of the District Manager, Food Corporation of India had also allegedly been misappropriated.

5.Various other alleged criminal misconducts on the part of the accused persons were said to have been committed in the State of Uttar Pradesh.

6.We may at this juncture notice some of the allegations made in the said complaint petition.

"8.According to Railway procedure, for allotment of railway rake, the party concerned shall have to pay Rs. 15,000.00 as indent money for registration of rake, for which Railway issue Money Receipt. Allotment of rake is made accordingly after the announcement of quota from the Railway Headquarters. The indentor is free to withdraw the indent money any time after ten days from the date of indenting, without any liability. Accordingly, Accused No. 2 collected total Rs. 4,91,39,748.00 out of which Rs. 1,55,07,928.00 was paid by Demand Draft favoring the concerned Railway authority and

balance amount of Rs. 3,36,31,820.00 paid to Accused No. Hanuman Prasad Ojha. All the Demand Draft in favour of the Railway Authorities were issued for your petitioner






















































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top