JUDGMENT :- This is a petition under Section 397/401 and in the alternative under Section 482, Criminal P.C., for setting aside the order of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Gr. Bombay, Shri G.V. Kalikar, dated 2nd March, 1981. By this order the learned Judge in exercise of revisional jurisdiction has set aside the order of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 22nd Court, Andheri, dated 29th April, 1980, staying the proceedings in Criminal Case No.478/S/78 before him pending decision of a civil suit on the original side of this Court.

2. In April, 1978 respondent 1 Lekhraj filed Criminal Complaint No.478/S/78 before the learned Magistrate against the present petitioners 1 and 2, viz. Bush India Ltd. and their Director Shri T.R. Mulchandani respectively, and the present respondent 3 Sabena Airways Ltd. for offences punishable under Sections 403, 406 and 420, I.P.C. Admittedly, petitioner 1 manufactures radio sets, cassettes and other allied items at Bombay. Respondent 1 is the partner of a business firm 'M/s. Pohoomal Kevalram Sons' of Bombay. The main allegations in the Criminal Complaint were that the petitioners had appointed respondent 1 firm as their sole agents for sale and export of their products to certain West African countries. Hereafter respondent 1 firm will be referred to as the agents for convenience. In return the agents were to get commission at 10%. It appears that in September 1975, the petitioners directly proceeded to despatch 80 cartons of radio sets to a concern in Kango called Kabiru Ado Trading Co. They handed over the consignment to respondent 2 for carriage and also made over the material documents to the agents for negotiating them with the banks. The grievance of the agents is that subsequently the petitioners approached the carriers and fraudulently got back the goods on the false pretext that they were defective. The agents' case was that the petitioners had made a false representation to them that they would not directly deal with any customers in the West African countries, except through them (that is, agents) and thereby induced the agents to disclose their own customers to the petitioners. Thereafter, the petitioners dishonestly took advantage of this disclosure and started dealing with the customers. Further according to the agents, the petitioners by handing over to them documents relating to the goods for negotiations with the Banks, had in law entrusted their custody to the agents. On these allegations, the agents held the petitioners responsible for offences punishable under Ss.403, 406 and 420, I.P.C. and the carriers for aiding the petitioners in commission of the offences.

3. Here it may be stated that on 9th December, 1975 petitioner 1 had filed a suit being Suit No.1395 on the Original Side of this Court, against the agents for a declaration that they were not their sole selling and exporting agents for the West African countries and for an injunction restraining them from laying such a claim. Damages were also claimed for alleged wrongful detention of petitioners' documents. The learned Magistrate issued process against the accused persons under Sections 403, 406 and 420, I.P.C. After being served, the present petitioner 1 filed an application before the learned Magistrate in March, 1979 for stay of the criminal proceedings pending the decision of suit. This application was allowed by the learned Magistrate by his order dated 29th April, 1980 and the criminal case was stayed. On revision by the agents, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge by the impugned order reversed the learned Magistrate's order.

4. Shri Vashi, who appears for the petitioners before me has raised two contentions. In the first place, Shri Vashi submits, the learned Sessions Judge's order is unsustainable on merits. The second submission is that the Sessions Court had no power to entertain revision against the original order of stay, as it is an interlocutory order within the meaning of Section 397 (2), Criminal P.C.,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document