( 1 ) THIS petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1974 (hereinafter called the Code ) for quashing the proceedings in a complaint dated 4-7-88 against the petitioner in which he has been summoned as an accused by order dated 15-11-88 has arisen in the following circumstances:-

( 2 ) THE petitioner claims that he is a permanent resident of Bhadohi, District Varanasi, U. P. carrying on his business as a supplier of carpets under the name and style of M/s. Jaswal Carpet Co. since a number of years. M/s. Mayur Carpets (P) Ltd. . respondent No. 2 has a branch office at Bhadohi. Both the parties had entered into a written agreement on 9th April, 1987 by which the petitioner was to supply unwashed and un-finished carpets to the Branch office of respondent No. 2 at Bhadohi. Accordingly the petitioner continued to supply such carpets to respondent No. 2 from time to time and also had been rendering proper accounts. However, disputes arose between the parties which led to the issuance of two notices dated 2nd February, 1988 and 2nd March, 1988 through Shri Surendra Nath Varma, Advocate, Gian Pur, Varanasi on behalf of respondent No. 2. Thereafter some terms and conditions of the original agreement dated 9th April, 1987 were varied by another subsequent agreement dated 4th February, 1988. The grievance of the petitioner is that both these agreements actually showed that they were entered into at Bhadohi and disputes arose primarily because of the refusal of respondent No. 2 at Bhadohi to fully and completely account for the carpets supplied by the petitioner and to maintain accounts in accordance with agreement dated 4-2-1988. Therefore, instead of resolving the disputes at their own end. respondent No. 2 filed a complaint under Section 406 of Indian Penal Code. against the petitioner on 4-7-88 at New Delhi in respect of the disputes which are primrily of a civil nature. Moreover, it is alleged that the New Delhi courts have no territorial jurisdiction to try the complaint. Hence this petition for quashing of the proceedings and order of issuance of summons against the petitioner.

( 3 ) I have heard Mr. J. L. Puri, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri P. C. Mathur, learned counsel for the respondent.

( 4 ) THE first written agreement between the parties is dated 9th April, 1987. A photo copy of this agreement as well as its English translation is placed on the file. There is no specific mention about the place where this agreement was entered into. However, it is referred in the beginning of this agreement that M/s. Mayur Carpets (P) Ltd. (respondent No. 2) has branch office at bye-pass road Bhadohi, District Varanasi and the place of business of the second party i. e. the petitioner is also shown as Bhadohi. It refers to an earlier agreement of September. 1986 on certain terms and conditions. One of the relevant terms is term No. 1, according to which the woollen handmade carpets were to be supplied by the petitioner to respondent No. 2 at its Bhadohi office. When the disputes arose between the parties. they entered into a second agreement dated 4-2-1988, a copy of that agreement is at page 24 of the file. In its heading, it clearly mentions that this agreement was reached at Bhadohi between the parties. The attesting witness Murari Lal also belonged to Bhadohi. Various invoices which are Annexures e from page 27 to 45 issued by the petitioner show that they were issuer to M/s, Mayur Carpets P. Ltd. . Bhadohi. The copy of the complaint is Annexure g which is at pages 49 to 53 of the file. In para-5 of the complaint, it is mentioned that the accused (petitioner) was introduced to the complainant (respondent No. 2) by his father Shri Murari Lal who was a very close friend of the Managing Director of the complainant company. Shri Inderjit Singh. It definitely therefore refers to same Shri Murari Lal who is an attesting witness of the agreement dated 4-3-88 between the parties and he is a re