IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized the need for substantial evidence and absence of mala-fide in criminal proceedings, and the binding nature of civil court decisions on criminal courts.

JUDGMENT :

SIDDHARTHA ROY CHOWDHURY, J.

1. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is filed by the petitioners seeking quashment of the proceeding of G.R. Case No. 561 of 2020 corresponding to Alipurduar Case No. 116 of 2020 dated 7th March, 2022 under Section 380/420/406/467/468/471/477A/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Briefly stated, Sri Sanjoy Pramanik, Manager (Garden) Patkapara Tea Estate of Dooars Plantation and Industrial Limited, Alipurduar informed the Inspector-in-charge of Alipurduar in writing that the accused persons Shayma Prasad Agarwal, Naresh Agarwal and Piyush Agarwal were the erstwhile Directors and in active control over the management of Dooars and Plantation and Industries Limited (hereinafter referred as ‘DPIL’). They owned tea gardens under the name and style “Patkapara Tea Estate.” The other accused persons namely Manju Agarwal, Vinay Agarwal, Anushree Agarwal, Vrinda Agarwal, Pankaj Bhognagarwala and Amit Bhognagarwala are their relatives and family members. The accused persons were in-charge of day to day running of the said company till the month of January 20, 2017.

3. It is alleged that the company DPIL was holding an amount of Rs. 45,35,652/- as cash in hand as on 31st March, 2017. The said amount was reflected in the Books of accounts of the company. The accused persons have withdrawn a sum of Rs. 27,08,475/- from the said account but the accused persons neither repaid nor accounted for the amount to the company. This issue was highlighted in the annual and accounts report of 2017 and 2018 but the accused persons did not care to take appropriate action.

4. Enquiry further revealed that the accused persons hatched a conspiracy and cheated the company by creating fake creditors with false identities and by incorporating sham transactions in the books of accounts of the company, they gained wrongfully and the company was made to suffer wrongful loss. It is further alleged that from the scrutiny of the audit report it was found that DPIL had removed illegally from the store, the materials of the company without any authorization and thereby committed offence of theft. It is further informed that the amount of money as well as stock that was misappropriated by the accused persons and siphoned by forging the records of the company and by creating fake and sham transactions, the accused persons made the company suffer loss to the tune of Rs. 4,94,04,496/-.

5. On the basis of such information Alipurduar Police Station Case No. 116 was registered on 7th March, 2020. Police took up investigation. The petition under consideration is filed to quash the instant proceeding, set into motion by the informant.

6. Heard Mr. Debasish Roy, learned Senior Counsel ably assisted by Mr. Sabyasachi Banerjee, learned Counsel for the Petitioners.

7. It is submitted by Mr. Roy, learned Senior Counsel that this criminal proceeding has been set into motion, in suppression of material facts with mala-fide intention to harass the petitioners. The informant did not disclose all the relevant facts with an oblique purpose. After entering into an agreement on 31st December, 2013 Roshanlal Agarwal took the control of the company. Roshanlal Agarwal and two of his nominees Deepak Bansal and Vivek Bansal were inducted as directors of the said company. To substantiate his claim Mr. Roy makes the Court go through Form No. INC-22, Annexure-P3. It is further contended that on 28th July, 2018 a letter was given to Shayma Prasad Agarwal, Naresh Agarwal and Pijush Agarwal on 28th July, 2018 and 28th September, 2018 stating, inter alia, that pursuant to the agreement Mr. Roshanlal Agarwal were to hold 50% of share while Mr. Shayama Prasad Agarwal and others were to hold 50% of shares and the parties to the agreement resolved to share the profit and loss in that ratio. Those three persons were requested to contribute their portion of loss and investment. As the same was not adhered to Money Suit No. 4 of 2019 was file