ORDER :

The present Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.,to call for the records relating to the charge sheet in C.C.No.157 of 2014 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Virudachalam and quash the same.

2. The allegations levelled against the petitioners, as per the charge sheet is that one Ganesan/defacto complainant, son of Palanirathinam is running a company under the name and style of “Grant Export” in Virudhachalam and in the said company, the said Ganesan was carrying on business with regard to import and export of Iron. The petitioners herein were running the company under the name and style of “Krishna Smelters” in Salem, in which they were carrying on the work with regard to melting of the old iron and they would sell the same to another company. The petitioners herein had visited the defacto complainant's company inperson on 23.04.2013 and demanded 100 tonnes of old iron and that the said agreement were reduced into writing, wherein 1 tonne of iron was fixed at Rs.23,000/-, the tax and lorry charges were at exclusive. The said agreement was signed by the 1st petitioner and the defacto complainant. Subsequently, the defacto complainant imported the Iron from the Company at Singapore and exported to the petitioners' company by three loads by way of Invoices to the tune of Rs.26,02,653/-. In view of damages and debris available in the Iron, the petitioners had requested the defacto complainant to subtract Rs.1,80,000/-. The petitioners had paid only Rs.6,00,000/- and failed to pay the balance consideration of Rs.18,22,653/- wantonly and therefore, a complaint was lodged and on account of the same, the petitioners were charged for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC. In support of the same, the witnesses who had received the iron in the petitioner's company, Village Administrative Officer, a person, employed in RSM Clearing Service, [who would clear the customs for the products received through Chennai Port Trust], Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax Officer, Sangagiri were examined under Section 161(3) Cr.P.C., Subsequently, a case was registered and charge sheet was filed in C.C.No.157 of 2014 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Virudhachalam. Seeking to call for the records and quash the same, the petitioners are before this Court.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that a pure commercial / contractual transaction has been given a criminal colour only for the purpose to harass the petitioners, which is not legally sustainable. The said transaction, as averred in the charge sheet, is purely borne out by contract dated 23.04.2013 and there is no criminality to attract the offences under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC. Further, the charges levelled under Sections 406 and 420 IPC does not attract to the present facts of the case.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners would also submit that as far as cheating is concerned, dishonest intention is the must, followed by inducement and delivery of property. In the present case, the charges against the petitioners, as stated above, is purely a commercial transaction governed by contract between the parties regarding purchase of goods. Further, without any prima facie triable charge, the charge sheet has been filed, hence, the learned counsel for the petitioners pleaded to quash the same.

5. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that on account of the interim stay granted by this Court on 21.01.2016, the trial cannot be proceeded with. Further, Section 161(3) statements were recorded from the persons, who dealt with the matter and who were involved in the case, in order to substantiate the case on the side of the prosecution and hence seeks to dismiss the present petition filed by the petitioners.

6. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the documents placed on record.

7. From the perusal of the record, it cou