( 1 ) QUASHING of the charge sheet dated 20th january,2000 in FIR No 103/99 under Section 406/420/120-8 indian Penal Code has been sought by Anil kohli, the petitioner herein, inter alia, on the ground that the complaint lodged by the complainant does not show any cognizable offence Reading of the complaint makes it a case of purely civil nature based on business transaction carried out for number of years.

( 2 ) ON the other hand Mr Inderjit Sharma, counsel for the complainant and Ms. Mukta Gupta, Standing counsel for the State contended that since the charge sheet has already been filed, therefore, this Court in its discretionary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, should not entertain this writ petition. All these objections raised in this petition can be looked into by the Trial Court where charge sheet is filed. Ms. Mukta Gupta, Standing Counsel for the State further contended that even if the complaint has a flavouring of civil nature, that by itself is no ground to quash the fir. There was inducement to cheat, hence, case under section 420 Indian Penal Code is made out. Counsel for the complainant supporting the prosecution contended that the complainant was forced to sign blank papers. The petitioner thus committed forgery beside cheating the complainant. Hence case of forgery is also made out.

( 3 ) IN order to appreciate the relevant contentions raised at the Bar we may have a quick glance to the facts of this case. Arun Kohli is the brother of the petitioner Ani1 Kohli. He was having his independent business in Germany under the name of M/s S. KLERE, Mode, gmbh. Anoop Sabharwal and Ashish Srivastava approached arun Kohli somewhere in the year 1991 when he visited india. Complainant sought help from Arun Kohli for setting up business of export of garments in Germany. Arun Kohli, brother of the petitioner was having well established business in Germany. Negotiations were held between Arun Kohli and complainants, thereupon Arun Kohli entered into business transaction with Anoop Sabharwal and Ashish Srivastava for the export of garment and fabric Anoop Sabharwal and Ashish Srivastava formed a partnership firm in the name and style of M/s Aman creation having its registered office at Delhi M/s Aman creation started exporting garments to the firm of petitioner s brother pursuant to the order placed by the petitioner s brother for himself or for on behalf of various business houses at Germany These business transactions of export of garment continued for a period of almost six years i. e. from 1991 to 1997 Goods worth rs. 15 crores were exported during this period by M/s Aman creation In respect of the goods exported by M/s Aman creation several complaints in respect of quality, delay and billing were raised by the firm petitioner s brother arun Kohli These complaints were lodged during the course of business by writing the debit notes Those debit notes were duly accepted and confirmed by M/s Aman creation When Arun Kohli demanded adjustment of amount of debit notes in the payments which were being regularly made to M/s Aman Creation in respect of the exports, the partners of M/s Aman Creation Shri Anoop Sabharwal and Ashish Srivastava requested not to make deduction of the amount of the debit notes and other trade discounts on the plea that they were facing financial crises they, however, assured that adjustment of the due amounts in future transactions would be made. Thus large amount became due from M/s Aman Creation to the firm of petitioner s brother which remained unpaid and for which m/s Aman Creation agreed and compromised to adjust in future transaction.

( 4 ) IT is also the case of the petitioner that because of the bad quality of the exported goods his brother suffered financial losses in terms of money and reputation which fact was duly brought to the notice of m/s Aman Creation and its partners in the year 1997. Because of the defective and poor quality and delay of shipments by com