2018 Supreme(Guj) 267
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
B.N. KARIA, J.
RAMESHBHAI RASIKLAL DESAI - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 5568 of 2011
Decided On : 09-01-2018
For the Appellant :MR JAL SOLI UNWALA for MR BOMI H SETHNA, ADVOCATE.
For the Respondent: MR KL PANDYA, App.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 406 and 420 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 482 – Quashment of FIR – Application has been filed by applicant/accused under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure praying to quash and set aside the complaint, registered with Police Station, for an offence punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code – Held, Court is of opinion that it is neither possible nor desirable to lay down an inflexible rule that would govern the exercise of inherent jurisdiction – Inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 CrPC, though are wide have to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with caution and only when it is justified by the tests specifically laid down in the statute itself – Court does not deem it to be a fit case to exercise powers vested under Section 482 CrPC in favour of the petitioner herein – Writ Petition Dismissed (Paras 20, 21)
1. The present Application has been filed by applicant/accused under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for brevity “CrPC”) praying to quash and set aside the complaint, being C.R. No. I- 55 of 2011 registered with Manjalpur Police Station, Vadodara for an offence punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Brief facts of the complaint are that the applicant is the Chairman and Managing Director of Tensile Steel Limited. The Government of Gujarat carried out procedure for acquisition of land by issuing notification and acquired land as per Notification of the year 1961 and given possession of the land, admeasuring about 98.901 sqr. meter of Survey no. 428/1 T.P. Scheme No. 19, Final Plot No. 150 to the concerned person of the Company. As per terms of allotment, on the occasion of selling the land in question, it shall be transferred after getting permission of the Government under Section 44(A) of the Land Acquisition Act and 50% of the proposed amount should be paid by the Unit. Even if, without getting any kind of permission of the Government, the applicant sold the land in question by a registered sale deed and by doing so, the applicant would be construed to have disobeyed the order of Government and then by committed an economic offence of cheating the Government. As per letter No. 356 of 2011 of the Sub Registrar, Vadodara dated 23.02.2011, as per jantri of the land in question, the approximate price comes to Rs. 1,00,80,000/- and while looking to the details mentioned at Sr. No. 2 in the statement of property regarding the land in question, the procedure to sale the land by way of registered sale deed was started on 10.02.2006 and thereby, the impugned complaint has been lodged.
3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Jal Soli Unwala for Mr. Bomi H. Sethna, learned advocate for the petitioner and learned advocate Mr. KL Pandya for the respondent no.1 State.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Jal Soli Unwala for Mr. Bomi H. Sethna, learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the applicant is the Chairman and Managing Director of Tensile Steel Limited. That, after carrying out procedure to acquire the land for the said company i.e., land admeasuring about 98.901 sqr. meter of Survey no. 428/1 T.P. Scheme No. 19, Final Plot No. 150 was handed over to the concerned person of the Company. That, initially, the Company was making profit and was delivering good results, and therefore, the Company started expanding its business, but because of reaction and having heavy compaction, the Company became weak in the production and it was declared as a “Sick unit” in the year 1980 and hence, the present applicant invested in the said Company and he became Chairman and Managing Director in the year 1983. That, previous management of the Company availed loan from various banks and also from financial institutions, from the State Government and Central Government and all the original documents pertaining to the said land, properties and installed machineries etc are in the custody of the said bank and Institutions. That, as the Company was making losses, it was registered as “Sick Industry” before the BIFR and the Board framed a scheme for revival of the Company and same was sanctioned on 12.12.1996 in case No. 25/87, wherein, at page No. 14 Para 8F (vii), it is specially mentioned that the State Government to grant necessary permission for sale/disposal of the land and not to charge any amount except those payable for change of user and usual municipal taxes and charges for development and to ultimate dispose off the property. In spite of that the Government of Gujarat has not given permission or obeyed the order, which was passed by BIFR and AAIFR and therefore, Tensile Steel Limited preferred Special Civil Application No. 3105 of 1998 before this Court, wherein an order was passed in favour of the petitioner. Hence, the main part of para 8F(vii) confers specific and effective relief to be granted by the Stat