No material inferring intention to deceive on the past of accused.

Petition under Sec. 482, Crl.P.C. to call for the records in Crime No. 1314 of 1989 on the file of Central Crime Branch, Egmore and quash the proceedings therein.

2. Petitioner Ganesan is doing business in electronic goods in the name and style of Sivasakthi Electronics at No. 23, Narasingapuram Street, Mount Road, Madras. On 11. 1989 he laid a complaint before the Central Crime Branch, Egmore, Madras against one Kasim, Ismail and Akbar alleging that on 10. 1989 one Arumugham came to his shop and represented that TV picture tubes were available for sale at No. 48, Vaithianatha Mudali Street, Mint, Madras. He also gave out that one Kasim, Ismail and Akbar are his partners. Pursuant to this, he proceeded to this shop along with one Srinivasan and another. He wanted to place the order for the picture tubes only on behalf of the said Srinivasan. In the house at Vaithianatha Mudali Street, Arumugham introduced Kasim, Ismail and Akbar to him. He negotiated and fixed the price of 50 picture tubes at Rs. 1,15,000. He got Rs. 1,15,000 from the said Srinivasan and handed it over to them. When he demanded receipt for the same, he was told that the goods as well as the receipt would be delivered at his shop within a short time. Thereafter he came back to his shop along with Arumugham and Srinivasan. Till 9.00 p.m. they waited in vain. He grew suspicious and again went to the house at Vaithianatha Mudali Street. There was nobody and Arumugham also gave a slip. On the next day morning Srinivasan gave a complaint before the Commissioner for the purpose of getting back the money. On that basis in the presence of Inspector Raj Mohan, he settled the amount due to Srinivasan. His complaint against Kasim and others was registered as a Crime No. 1291 of 1989 under Sec. 420 read with Sec. 34, I.P.C. The Inspector of Police took up this for investigation and later on referred the same as mistake of fact.

3. In the meanwhile on 111. 1989 at 4.00 p.m. Srinivasan lodged the impugned complaint before the Central Crime Branch, Egmore, Madras which was registered as Crime No. 1314 of 1989 under Sec. 420 read with Sec. 34, I.P.C. In this he has stated that he is doing business in TV and servicing the same at C.B. Puram, Bangalore. On 110. 1989 he met Ganesan at M/s.Naidu Electronics in Mount Road and informed him that he was prepared to take 50 pieces of TV picture tubes. The price was negotiated and fixed at Rs. 1,15,000. Ganesan and his son-in-law as well as one Arumugam represented that the stock was ready at Thiruvottiyur and wanted that payment should be made before taking delivery. All the three took him to Vaigunda Vathiar Street in Mint. There they introduced him to one Kasim. Then as desired by all the four, he paid Rs. 1,15,000 to Ganesan. Ganesan asked him to wait outside. He saw Ganesan receiving some commission from Kasim. He was informed that TV picture tubes would be handed over to him at 4.00 p.m. in the shop of Ganesan. Though he waited there nobody turned up. Ganesan started giving lame excuses. He grew’ suspicious and reported the matter before City Crime Branch Police. On the next morning of 10. 1989 Ganesan and his son-in-law issued two post dated cheques to him for Rs. 63,000 and paid the balance of Rs. 52,000 in cash. On their request he informed the police not to take any action. Later on, the two cheques dated 20.10.1989 and 210. 1989 were dishonoured. All the four have played a calculated fraud on him.

4. In this application Ganesan the accused in Crime No. 1314 of 1989 seeks to quash the proceedings therein by invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this court under Sec. 482, Crl.P.C. Thiru Karpagavinayagam, learned counsel for the quash petitioner submits that the entire narration of events would reveal that it is Ganesan who was the victim in this episode. Even as per the complaint in Crime No. 1314 of 1989 Ganesan had settled the amount due to Srinivasan by paying Rs. 52,000 in cash and issuing two post dated cheques