Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.

Heard Mr. P.K. Shahi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Alok Kumar Agrawal, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Jitendra Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. B.N. Pandey, Advocate for the private respondent.

2. Petitioner has moved this Court for quashing of the First Information Report (FIR) being Kotwali (Patna) P.S. Case No. 601/14 dated 01.10.2014 registered under Sections 406/420/468/470/471/506/120B of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegations, as appearing from the written complaint made by the respondent no. 5, who is an Assistant Manager of a Company engaged in the business of procurement in commodities for buyers providing an electronic trading platform for spot contract in commodities etc., are as under.

3.1 It is alleged that this petitioner along with Smt. Pushpa Devi Agrawal and Sri Ranjit Agrawal as also Sri Dipak Agrawal and Sri Sunil Bhalotia approached the informant and one Mr. Abhay Kumar working at the Patna Office of the complainant Company. The petitioner allegedly introduced himself as the Director of Progressive Sales Pvt. Ltd. engaged in the business of Sugar Trading since 1988.

The informant was given to understand that Mr. Sunil Bhalotia is the brother of one Sri Ram Bhalotia and Sri Prakash Bhalotia who were already in the business of trading through National Spot Exchange Limited (NSEL) under their Procurement Agreement. It is further alleged that the petitioner represented himself as a renowned member of Magadh Stock Exchange (MSE) being associated with Iron & Steel Industry business in Patna.

3.2 The allegation is that during the meeting all the accused persons misrepresented that M/s Ayush Sales Pvt. Ltd. is a established entity in different trading business, particularly in Sugar Trade since 2005 and represented that their association will be beneficial. The allegation also states that the accused persons handed over a fake profile of their company depicting the aforesaid false and frivolous claims and in the said profile Mr. Ranjit Kumar Pansari was mentioned as a business partner of M/s Ayush Sales Pvt. Ltd. and Mr. Dipak Agrawal as a person for reference. This petitioner and Mrs. Pushpa Agrawal also submitted their personal Bio-Data, their PAN Card and Voter I.D. Card. In the Voter I.D. Card the father's name of Raj Kumar Agrawal has been mentioned as Jagdish Prasad Agrawal but, as per allegation, in the PAN Card his father's name was shown as Phoolchand Agrawal.

3.3 As the allegation goes on, it is stated that the complainant company signed a Procurement Agreement on 04.04.2011 with the accused company, namely, M/s Ayush Sales Pvt. Ltd. through its Director Mr. Raj Kumar Agrawal (petitioner) and the accused company made substantial business transactions with the complainant.

3.4 It is alleged that in March, 2012 the accused persons insisted for amendment in Procurement Agreement and represented that by the amended agreement the complainant company would be entitled to a profit of 1.20% out of their big order taking into consideration the purchase value. Allegedly they further induced by assuring that in case of quick procurement of sugar the corresponding invoice will be cleared in two working days instead of 20 days; thereafter the accused persons assured that they would hand over post dated cheques to ensure immediate clearance of outstanding amount accruing time to time against the payment to be made by NSEL. This led to signing of an amended Procurement Agreement dated 01.04.2012 with the present petitioner.

3.5 It is further alleged that on 25.09.2012 the accused persons placed a Procurement Order to the complainant company for one rake of sugar containing 25, 500 quintals @ Rs. 3548/- per quintal to be procured from a seller and for this the complainant company made the payment. Thereafter, the complaint raised an invoice dated 03.10.2012 on the accused company. However, the accused company did not clear the invoice for Rs. 9.73 Crores even afte