IMPORTANT POINT
The Court established that allegations of misappropriation and cheating can constitute a criminal offense if the essential elements are present, even in a contractual context.

JUDGMENT :

KAUSHIK GOSWAMI, J.

Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. A.H. Ahmed, learned counsel for the accused petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2 and Mr. R.R. Kaushik, learned APP for the State respondents.

2. By filing the instant petition under Section 482 CrPC, 1973, the accused petitioner is seeking quashing of the First Information Report being registered as Hatigaon PS Case No. 264/2023 registered under Section 419/406/420 IPC.

3. The facts of the case are as follows:-

The accused petitioner was engaged as Consultant of Hudson Foods Private Limited by Consultant Engagement Agreement dated 19.04.2021 to provide services as set forth in Appendix-A of the said Agreement and the Company agreed to pay the Consultant as mentioned in Appendix-B of the said Agreement. Accordingly, the accused petitioner was working as Consultant of the said Company since 2019.

4. While the accused petitioner was working with the said company since 2019, on 08.08.2023 one Aditya Haralalka/informant lodged an FIR against the accused petitioner before the Hatigaon Police Station alleging interalia that one Nilank Kashyap under the authority of the present accused petitioner placed order of different poultry commodities. It is further alleged that pursuant thereto, the goods were transported from the factory of the company to the company’s Godown at Sonapur, Guwahati and the stocked were received by one employee Baban Pathak but on inquiry it came to light that the stocks were missing from the Godown and accordingly, it is alleged that the accused petitioner alongwith the others have stolen the goods and sold the product and thereby committed breach of trust of the company. Accordingly, a case has been registered as Hatigaon Police Station Case No. 264/2023 under Section 419/406/420 IPC.

5. The present petition is being filed for quashing the said FIR.

6. Mr. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel submits that on bare perusal of FIR and taking the allegations as correct, a prima facie case has not been made out under Section 419/406/420 IPC against the accused petitioner. He further submits that there are no ingredients present in the FIR to constitute the offences under Section 419/406/420 IPC against the accused petitioner.

7. He further submits that the accused petitioner executed the Lease Deed dated 09.09.2022 as an authorized signatory of the Hudson Food Private Limited only. He further submits that the Godown at Sonapur is under the control of the company and the accused petitioner was not entrusted with the goods which were delivered in the company Godown. He further submits that the goods were transported by the company from its factory to its Godown at Sonapur as would be evident from the Delivery Notes. He accordingly submits that as the goods were transported from Principal to Principal basis, there is no way the accused petitioner can be held responsible for its alleged misappropriation.

8. He further submits that the allegation of order having been placed by one Nilank Kashyap under the authority of the accused petitioner is absolutely false and fabricated allegation. He further submits that there is no authorization letter issued by the accused petitioner to said Nilank Kashyap and that on the other hand, said Nilank Kashyap is not any employee or agent of the company. He accordingly submits that if the company believed and accepted the order placed by the said Nilank Kashyap and goods were transported to him, for that the accused petitioner cannot be held responsible. He further submits that as per FIR, the goods were received by one Baban Pathak, the Godown-In-Charge, and that he was appointed by the company.

9. He accordingly submits that Section 419/420 IPC cannot be attracted to hold a person guilty of cheating unless it is shown that he/she had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making the promise. He accordingly submits that in the instant case,