Gujarat High Court
Judgename :D.P.Buch
DCM HYUNDAI LIMITED - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondent
CRI.M.A. 422 of 2001
Decided On : 11/07/2003
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Central Act 2 of 1974) - Sec. 482 - Quashing - Criminal complaint - Respondent No. 2 filed complaint under Sec. 420 read with 114 IPC alleging that second respondent was cheated jointly by petitioner - Held, on facts, ingredients of the offence under Sec. 420 prima facie appear to exist against petitioner and second respondent has to be given opportunity to prove them - As a result petition is dismissed.
Court cannot decide, at this stage, the truthfulness of the allegations made in the complaint. While considering an application for quashing a complaint under Sec. 482 of the said Code, the only requirement is to ascertain as to whether the allegations made in the complaint, if stand uncontroverted, would lead to some offence. Applying the said ratio to the facts in hand, it would be quite clear that there are allegations against the petitioners regarding their involvement in the complaint and, therefore, the second respondent has to be given an opportunity to proceed ahead with the complaint and to prove the allegations made in para 3 of the complaint.
[Para 16]
( 1 ) THIS is a petition under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, (for short, the Code) for quashing a complaint being criminal case No. 360 of 2000 filed by respondent no. 2, herein, against the petitioners for an offence punishable under section 420 read with section 114 of IPC. The said complaint has been placed at page no. 27 at Annexure b to the petition. The second respondent has been shown as the complainant and the petitioners herein have been shown as accused persons in the said complaint. There it has been alleged that the complainant being the second respondent herein is a Body Corporate carrying on business as manufacturer of various Hot Rolled Coils/sheets/plates etc. at its workplace at Hazira, in District Surat of Gujarat State. That it has its registered office at the same place. The second respondent has also alleged in the complaint that the first petitioner is a limited company and other petitioners are responsible officers and Directors of the said company. In order to appreciate the said contentions, both factual and legal, it would be appropriate to reproduce paras 3 to 8 hereinbelow:" (3 ). The accused no. 1 is a limited company carrying on business at the address mentioned in the cause title. Accused no. 2 is a Chairman. Accused no. 3 is a Managing Director, accused no. 4 is Whole-time Director and accused nos. 5, 6, 7 and 8 are Directors of accused no. 1-company. They all are/were at all relevant time in-charge or responsible to the company for conduct of its business and as such all of them are liable to be convicted and for punished for aforesaid offence on following main grounds. (4) The accused persons against various Bills of Exchange purchased Hot Rolled Coils/sheets/plates from the complainant company at Hazira District Surat and the accused persons have accepted for payment, those Bills of Exchange each of 90 days, drawn by the complainant and the accused have received the required materials with invoices thereof during the period from February 1997 to December, 1997. (5) While purchasing the materials from the complainant, accused persons had promised to make its payment on due date of Bills of Exchange and thereby the accused had induced the complainant company to supply to them, the required materials and accordingly the complainant actually supplied to them the required materials and invoices thereof and having received the materials, accused did not make its payment and without any valid reason, Bankers of the accused dishonoured, the Bills of Exchange which were sent to them for payment by Allahabad Bank, Nanpura Bank, Surat, as Banker of the complainant. (6) The complainant company keeps Books of Account in regular course or business and as per books of accounts of the complainant, balance outstanding against the accused persons is of Rs. 72,92,906. 34 paise plus over due interest @ 24% per annum from 1. 1. 1998 to 31. 10. 2000 which comes to Rs. 71,95,577. 97 ps. So, total outstanding against the accused comes to Rs. 1,44,88,483. 31 ps. The accused persons have confirmed the balance of Rs. 61,45,885. 31 ps. on 30. 10. 1998 in writing as payable to the complainant. Even then the accused persons have not paid even that much amount. (7) The complainant have written various letters to the accused persons and had demanded their dues but the accused persons did not pay it and went before the Board of Industrial and Financial Reconstruction, New Delhi by lodging case no. 151/98. The complainant has got noted their claim before the said Board and has requested the Board to join them as a party. (8) Above conduct of the accused persons in inducing the complainant company to deliver to them required materials on the strength of false promises of making payment on due dates and in accepting for payment on due dates, various Bills of Exchange and after receipt of the materials backing out from their promises and in dishonouring the Bills of Exchange through their Banker
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.