( 1 ) BY this petition u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Vijay Khanna, petitioner, challenges proceedings in complaint case No. 311-0, filed by Jumbo Electronics Co. Ltd. , respondent No. 1 herein, for alleged offences under Sections 42014651468 and 471 Indian Penal Code. against the petitioner, and pending in the Court below, as well as the order made by the Court below, on June 4, 1983. by which the court issued the process against the petitioner. By the said order the Court also directed that an intimation be sent about the pendency of the case to the Passport Officer concerned, informing the said officer that the presence of the petitioner was required in the Court in connection with the case.

( 2 ) ACCORDING to the complaint, a copy of which is enclosed as Annexure-I to the petition, Jumbo Electronics Co. Ltd. , the respondent, carries on business in London in Video Cassettes and other electronics goods, and Pranab Kumar Banerjee, though whom the complaint is filed, is the company s repre sentative at New Delhi, who functions under a senior officer of the. Company, Vinod Bajaj, from A-464, Defence Colony, in New Delhi. The Company has a telephone no. 611404 at the said premises. It is alleged that various communications between the company and the petitioner took place "from A-464, Defence Colony. New Delhi. " It is alleged that in the last week of August, 1982, petitioner-accused got in touch with Vinod Bajaj on telephone from London at the above number and told him that he was "managing Director of Cammtex Ltd. " and wanted to purchase from the respondent a large-quantity of blank video cassettes worth 100,000 against two postdated cheques of 50,000 each and that the goods were intended to be exported to India and the cheques would be encashed on due dates. It is further alleged that the petitioner requested him to accept his proposal and help him getting the video cassettes representing that he was "a man of lakhs and he should not have any anxiety about the payment and encashment of cheques". According to the complaint, "vinod Bajaj accepted and believed the representation of the accused. Consequently, Vinod Bajaj informed Mr. Gehani in London that the accused wanteu to purchase a large quantity of blank video cassettes worth , 1,00,000 against two post-dated cheques of , 50,000 tach. Vinod Bajaj further informed Gehani that he has accepted the same. " It. is further alleged that the petitioner "developed friendship with Mr. Gehani, Company Secretary and General Manager of the Company at London. The accused used to make small purchases from the complainant company since March, 1982. Slowly and gradually, the accused made him (Gehani) believe that the accused is an honest and reliable person and his financial position was sound. " According to the complainant on September 8, 1982, "the accused made a represetation to Mr. Gehani that he (petitioner) was a man of lakhs and he was Managing Director of the company Commtex Ltd. and he wants to purchase blank video cassettes worth. 50,000 for export to India. He would give the payment by a post-dated cheques of December 6, 1982", representing "that he had sufficient funds in the bank and when the cheque would be submitted to the Bank the said cheque would be be encashed. " A further representation is said to have been made by the petitioner that "he would get the export certificate of the goods from the shipping company so that the Value Added Tax should not be imposed on the complainant. " It is alleged that Gehani "acted upon the said false representation of the accused and received a cheque dated 6th December. 1982 for 50,000 and delivered the goods to the accused. " The goods are said to have been delivered to the petitioner on September 8, 15, 20 and 21, 1982, and it is alleged that when the petitioner took delivery of the "goods on September 20, 1982, he gave another post-dated cheque for 10th December, 1982 for. 50,000" with a further assuran