The petitioner has filed this application under Section 561-A of the Cr. P. C. for quashing of the Proceedings titled "Sh. Maharaj Kishan Raina Vs B. M. Tondon in a criminal complaint pending in the Court of City Magistrate Srinagar. An alternative prayer has been made for the transfer of the said case from the court of the City Magistrate Srinagar to some other court of competent jurisdiction at Jammu in the event the proceedings are not quashed.

2. The respondent herein filed a complaint in the court of C. J. M, Srinagar wherein it was alleged by him that he was carrying on the business of the manufacture of PVC cables in the Industrie1 Estate at Burzalla and for that purpose was importing material outside the country That on a representation made by the petitioner at Srinagar, that he would collect the goods imported by the complainant and send the same to him at Srinagar, the respondent gave an authority to him to collect the goods at part of receipt and dispatch the same him. The respondent gave blank forms duly signed by him, to enable the petitioner to receive the goods at the port which were subject matter of four import permits issued by the Govt. of India. It is then alleged by the respondent in his complaint that if the accused had not represented that he would clear and receive the goods and despatch the same to the respondent he would not have given the signed blank froms and the authority to the petitioner. It is further alleged in the complaint that the petitioner collected the goods covered by the import licences and did not send the same to the respondent and retained the goods without any right to do so in breach of trust. On these averments the respondent had prayed that the petitioner be summoned for the offences under section 406/420 of the R. P. C. and after enquiry be punished for the same offences.

3. After recording the preliminary evidence, warrants were issued against the petitioner on 22-8-74. The petitioner was not served as he kept on evading service on numerous occasions and the warrnats issued for his production could not executed. The present petition for quashing of the proceedings was filed on 15-6-76, when the warrnats had not been executed and the petitioner had not appeared even once before the trial court at Srinagar.

4. Mr. H. L. Bhagotra, appearing for the petitioner submits that the contents of the complaint do not disclose the commission of any offence and that in fact the respondent owned a sum of Rs.21.OOO/- to the petitioner and when a demand was made for the payment of that amount a false and frivolous complain was lodged by him. It is also urged that the dispute between the parties is of a civil nature and that the criminal complaint has been filed only to harras the petitioner and that the proceedings therefore are an abuse of process of the court. In the alternative Mr. Bhagotra has prayed that the case be transferred to a competent court at Jammu since the petitioner belongs to Jullunder and if the case is tried at Jammu it will be to the convenience of the parties Mr. Bhagotra further states that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay the expenses of the witnesses of complainant for their appearance at Jammu.

5. Mr. Puri appearing for the respondent has on the other hand urged that a bare reading of the complaint shows that the petitioner had committed the offence alleged against him and that this court should not interfere at this preliminary stage. He has further submitted that the normal process of a criminal trial should not be permitted to be cut short by this method.

6. I have given my anxious considerations to the respective contentions raised at the bar.

Sec. 420 of the R P. C. reads as under :

"Whether cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any preperty to any person or to make alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable secu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document