( 1 ) THESE two applications under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, [for short "code"] have been preferred by the concerned petitioners for quashing and setting aside two private complaints filed on 22/06/1998 by contesting respondent - Dhanesh Badarmal Jain being Criminal Case Nos. 2264 and 2263 of 1998 respectively before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 9 at Ahmedabad City against the present petitioners for offences punishable under Sections 407, 420, read with Sections 34 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

( 2 ) SO far Misc. Criminal Application No. 2465 of 1998 is concerned, the concerned complainant has filed Criminal Case No. 2264 of 1998 stating that the said complainant is carrying on business as sole proprietor of the concern known as Mahavir Apparels at Ahmedabad. According to him, he is carrying on business as garment manufacturer and exporter and, therefore, he exports the consignments to various countries from time to time.

( 3 ) IT is further contended in the complaint that the present petitioners along with other accused persons have also been managing affairs in the names of M/s. Singapore Air Lines Limited, M/s. Trans Arabia Transport (P) Limited and M/s. New Glob Air Services (P) Limited at the address shown in the complaint.

( 4 ) IT is alleged in the said complaint that the present petitioners along with other accused persons had undertaken to carry complainants goods [material of accessories for readymade garments] as detailed in complainants Invoice dated 29/04/1997 produced with the said complaint having a value of Rs. 7,67,232-00 [equivalent 119,830-00 French Frac] [the said Invoice is produced in the complaint]. It is further alleged in the complaint that the present petitioners undertook to carry and deliver the said consignment "to ORDER" as instructed by the complainant with the stipulation that on payment of the value of the consignment by the notified party i. e. M/s. BANKCO S. A. of France through the Bank and on presentment of the consignees Airway Bills to the accused, the goods of the Invoice would be delivered to the notified party namely M/s. BANKCO S. A. by the accused. In other words, the petitioners were required to see that the said purchaser should get released the original Airway Bills from the Bank after making payment of consideration of the consignment to the said Bank and on presentment of the said original Airway Bills, the consignment was required to be delivered to the purchaser.

( 5 ) IT is further alleged in the said complaint that the accused persons by agreeing and accepting the invoice dated 29/04/1997 for goods material of Ladies Knitted T-shirts of the value stated hereinabove and promising and assuring the complainant by their Airway Bills dated 02/05/1997, induced the complainant deliver to and entrust to them the said goods material of the complainant on clear stipulation incorporated in their Airway Bills that the material would be delivered only on presentation and production of the Original Airway Bills and release order from the Bank of the notified party i. e. TO ORDER and was to be delivered to the notified party only thereafter. The complainant has also alleged in the said complaint that the accused persons carried the said consignments from Bombay to Paris. That, however, the complainant came to know that the said accused persons have delivered the said consignments to the said purchaser without production of Original Airway Bills release order obtained from their Bank on payment of the consideration of the said consignments. That this has been done against the clear understanding and agreement between the parties. It is further alleged that the accused persons were bound to see that Original Airway Bills and other relevant documents are produced before handing over of the consignments to the said purchaser. It is also alleged in the complaint that the said accused, their servants and agents have instead of disch