Back
2022 Supreme(Cal) 1629
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
TIRTHANKAR GHOSH, J.
Oil India Limited & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
Ashok Kumar Bajoria & Ors. - Opposite Parties
CRR No. 1177 of 2021
Decided On : 12-12-2022
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sudhakar Prasad, Mr. Somopriya Chowdhury, Mr. N. Banerjee.
For the Opposite Parties : Mr. Indrajit Adhikari, Mr. Ayan Bhattacharya, Mr. Suman Majumder.
IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a civil dispute should not be given the color of a criminal proceeding, and certain disputes should be addressed by approaching statutory authorities.
Headnote:
Forgery - Arbitration Award - Indian Penal Code Sections 120B/406/418/420/465/468/471/477A - The court discussed the legal provisions related to forgery, cheating, and criminal breach of trust under the Indian Penal Code and emphasized the need to approach statutory authorities for certain disputes. The court also highlighted the principle that a civil dispute should not be given the color of a criminal proceeding.
Fact of the Case:
The complainant received an Arbitration Award in their favor but alleged that the accused company and its officers forged and altered a tax invoice, causing wrongful loss to the complainant. The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate issued process against the accused under various sections of the Indian Penal Code.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the case was initiated to recover a part of the non-paid amount by giving a civil dispute the color of a criminal proceeding, which it deemed an abuse of the process of law. The court quashed the proceedings before the Metropolitan Magistrate, concluding that it would cause a miscarriage of justice.
Issues: The issues revolved around the alleged forgery and alteration of a tax invoice by the accused company and its officers, leading to charges of conspiracy, cheating, and criminal breach of trust. The court also considered the appropriate approach for disputes related to tax payments and settlement agreements.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need to approach statutory authorities for certain disputes and highlighted the principle that a civil dispute should not be given the color of a criminal proceeding. It also considered the lack of personal benefit to the accused officers and the policy decision of the accused company regarding the fixation of the principal amount.
Final Decision: The court quashed the proceedings before the Metropolitan Magistrate, stating that it would be an abuse of the process of the court and cause a miscarriage of justice. The revisional application was allowed, and all concerned parties were directed to act in terms of the court's order.
JUDGMENT :
Tirthankar Ghosh, J.
1. The present revisional application has been preferred challenging the proceedings relating to Case No. CS 10938 of 2021 pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 13th Court, Calcutta under Sections 120B/406/418/420/465/468/471/477A of the Indian Penal Code and all orders passed therein.
2. Mr. Somopriyo Chowdhury, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners draws the attention of this court to the relevant assertions made in this revisional application that the petitioner no. 1 is a public sector undertaking wholly owned by the Government of India and the petitioner no. 2 is the Chief General Manager (Legal) of petitioner no.1, Oil India Limited.
3. The subject matter of the complaint relates to an Arbitral Award passed in favour of the complainant which was passed on 30.11.2019 in AP No. 1732 of 2015.
4. It has been alleged that the said Arbitration Proceedings was initiated at the instance of the complainant against the accused company/petitioner no. 1 for non-payment of his dues in respect of Contract No. 6103037 dated 07.04.2009. The contract was executed between the complainant and the accused company for installation of pipelines across the river Teesta by HDD for NSPL expansion. After the Award was passed in favour of the complainant company and against the accused/company, the other accused persons on behalf of the accused company approached the complainant to settle the dispute and requested him not to proceed for execution. By their representation, the accused persons undertook to comply with the Award by reimbursing the Awarded amount of Rs.7,18,87,644/-.
5. It was represented that in respect of similar Arbitral Award, the accused company paid to M/s. Dewanch and Ramsaran Industries(P) Ltd. along with all applicable taxes and to that effect produced the relevant papers.
6. Relying upon such representations of the accused persons, the complainant reposed faith in them and entered into a Settlement Agreement dated 7th January, 2020. The said Agreement was signed by the S.K. Senapati (petitioner no.2) and the rest of the accused persons assured the complainant to comply with the terms and conditions of the Agreement.
7. A Tax Invoice bearing no. HI/2019-20/29 dated January 08, 2020 was raised by the complainant by keeping the base amount of Rs.7,18,87,644/- being the awarded amount. As per mandatory amount of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, 9% was charged in the said tax invoice.
8. The accused no. 3, Utpal K. Sharma vide e-mail dated 9th January, 2020 acknowledged the tax invoice and refused to pay the GST part over and above the awarded amount on the plea that the Award or Settlement Agreement does not contemplate any such amount and they pressurized the complainant to change the tax invoice which he refused. In various e-mails to the accused persons the complainant requested them to pay the GST bill which is statutorily applicable like TDS in tune with the Arbitral Award, there was no reply as the complainant has expressed his inability to revise the invoice and intimate the accused to treat his raised invoice as withdrawn and cancelled because the accused persons were not agreeable to pay as per invoice.
9. With utter shock and surprises, the complainant received the information from the banker on 10th January, 2020 that the accused persons illegally and unilaterally processed the bill as per reverse calculation basis by deducting the base price to Rs.6,09,21,732.20/- instead of the settlement amount of Rs.7,18,87,644/- reducing the principal payable amount by Rs.1,09,65,912/- in willful disregard of the Arbitration Award and in gross violation with the terms and conditions of the said Settlement Agreement.
10. On inspection of the records, the complainant was shocked to learn that instead of returning cancelled tax invoice, the accused persons in a league, motivatedly and intentionally forged and altered the fig
