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

2019 Supreme(Bom) 1449

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
S.S. SHINDE, J.
Manipal Soubhagya Nidhi Ltd. — Appellant
Versus
Ramesh Prabhu – Respondent
Criminal Writ Petition No. 845 to 849 of 2004
Decided on : 10-10-2019

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
M.K. Kocharekar, Adv., A.R. Patil, Adv.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code - 403, 405, 406, 419, 420, 425, 426 r/w 34 - challenging the order - Trial Court - Producing appropriate evidence - . It is case of complainants that Accused acted as an authorized agent of Accused Company with consent authority and knowledge of Accused replied and denied receipt of amount from complainants - It is stated in complaints that by said reply notice Accused informed that Accused are taking action against Accused for his wrongful acts done by him during course of employment - Therefore Complainants have filed Criminal Complaints against all accused for offences punishable under Sections 403, 405, 406, 419, 420, 425 and 426 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code – Held, Considering allegations made in complaints and material produced on record which prima facie indicates that said scheme was floated by Petitioner company on basis of which complainants were deceived and induced to pay amount to Accused as the representative of Accused accepted money from complainants under said scheme on behalf of Accused appears that in reply to notice of the complainants Petitioners have informed complainants that Accused are taking necessary actions against Accused his wrongful acts done by him during the course of employment - Considering contents of said reply also the undertaking given by Accused prima facie it cannot be said that Accused Company and its office bearers have no concern with Accused they can be absolved from any responsibility about money of complainants - Considering allegations in complaints it cannot be said that Petitioners are not responsible for the act of inducing complainants to pay money to is required to be noted that the Complainants have given amount to Accused as a trustee of Accused to invest amount appropriately and return same along with the benefits under said Scheme - On basis of material produced on record Trial Court has came to a conclusion that prima facie case is made out against the accused and learned Additional Sessions Judge did not deem it to interfere with order of learned Magistrate – Petition dismissed

JUDGMENT :

S.S. Shinde, J.

The above group of Petitions have been filed by the Petitioners, who are original Accused Nos.1 to 3, challenging the order of issuance of process dated 17/12/1999, order dated 11/09/2001 rejecting their discharge applications and, the order dated 17/01/2003 dismissing their Revision Applications. Respondent No.1 herein are the original complainants who have filed separate complaints against the Petitioners in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nashik. It is submitted across the bar that the facts involved in all the above Writ Petitions are similar. In all the Writ Petitions the Petitioners are same and, Respondent No.1 - original complainants are different who have filed separate Criminal Complaints against the Petitioners. Respondent No.1 - original complainants have filed separate Criminal Complaints against the Petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 403, 405, 406, 419, 420, 425, 426 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. In Writ Petition No.845 of 2004 the Criminal Complaint No. is 270 of 1999, in Writ Petition No.846 of 2004 the Criminal Complaint No. is 271 of 1999, in Writ Petition No.847 of 2004 the Criminal Complaint No. is 268 of 1999, in Writ Petition No.848 of 2004 the Criminal Complaint No. is 269 of 1999, and in Writ Petition No.849 of 2004 the Criminal Complaint No. is 152 of 1999. Therefore, by consent of the learned counsel for the parties, all the Writ Petitions are heard together and being disposed of by this common judgment, and Writ Petition No.845 of 2004 is treated a s a lead matter.

2. This Court (Coram : A S Aguiar, J) by order dated 03/09/2004 has already issued Rule in all the Writ Petitions.

3. All the Writ Petitions take an exception to the order of issuance of process dated 17/12/1999 passed by the learned Magistrate, 3rd Court, Nashik in the aforesaid criminal cases and, the order dated 17/12/2003 passed by the learned IInd Ad-hoc Addl. District Judge, Nashik in the Revision Applications filed by the Petitioners against the order dated 11/09/2001 passed by 5th Jt. Civil Judge, Junior Division & JMFC Nashik rejecting their discharge applications.

4. The facts giving rise to filing of Writ Petitions, can in brief, be stated as under :-

The Complainants are employed with M/s. Polymer Products, Satpur, Nashik. The Petitioners are arraigned as Accused Nos. 1 to 3 along with other accused in the Criminal Cases filed by the Complainants. Petitioner No.1 is Original Accused No.1, Petitioner No.2 is Original Accused No.2 and Petitioner No.3 is Original Accused No.3. Petitioner No.1 is a public limited company. Petitioner No.1 Company is conducting and running various types of deposit schemes while Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 were the Chairman and Managing Director of Petitioner No.1 Company respectively. It is alleged in the Complaints that the whole affairs of Petitioner No.1 company are controlled, supervised and regulated by Petitioner Nos.2, as also the appointments, terminations, settlements and other police decisions are taken by the Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 for and on behalf of Petitioner No.1 company. Original Accused No.4 is the present Branch Manager who is looking after the business activities and all other financial activities of Nashik Branch of Petitioner No.1 Company. Original Accused No.5 was the Branch Manager during the period 1997-98, who was appointed by Accused Nos.2 and 3. Original Accused No.6 was controlled, regulated, supervised and authorized by Accused Nos.1 to 3. The complainants learnt that the proprietor of M/s. Polymer Products have also invested and deposited huge amount with Accused No.1 Company. It is alleged by the complainants that original accused No.5 used to visit their premises for soliciting and promoting deposit scheme of Accused No.1 Company. The complainants deposited an amount of Rs.19,000/- each by cash with accused No.5 for fixed deposit in Sowbhagya Nidhi Cash Certificate Scheme. Accused No.5 after receiving the cash issued ackn

      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