SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Mad) 2940

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G. ILANGOVAN, J.
Gopal - Appellant
Versus
The Inspector of Police, (Law & Order) North Police Station - Respondent
Crl. O.P.(MD)No.10597 of 2017 and Crl MP(MD)Nos.7254 & 7255 of 2017
Decided on : 17-03-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. E.J.Ayyappan Mr. A.K.Manickam
For the Respondent: Mr. M.Ganesan, Mr.K.Vinayagam

Headnote:

Indian penal code, 1860 - Section 420 - Quash of proceedings – Dishonour of cheque - Second respondent was stated to be a Government Servant and he has also assured that he will stood as guarantor due payment of money, so that, Mill can supply Yarn on credit basis - Seeking quashment of final report, petitioner, before Trial Court, has filed this petition, mainly on ground that he is no way connected with business affairs of accused Nos.1 to 4 and entire transaction took place only between defacto complainant and above said persons – Held, there is no allegation to effect that at time of entering into business transaction this petitioner along with others intentionally entered into business transaction to cheat defacto complainant Company - Materials collected by Investigating Officer also do not suggest any inference to be drawn that this petitioner intentionally deceived defacto complainant to enter into business transaction - No ingredients of offence is attracted against this petitioner - Charge sheet filed against this petitioner is quashed - Criminal Original Petition allowed.

ORDER :

1. This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.410 of 2005 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Rajapalayam, in so far as the petitioner/5th accused is concerned.

2. Facts and case as mentioned in the final report filed by the first respondent before the Trial Court:-

The defacto complainant is running a Mill called 'Janakiraman Mills' at Rajapalayam. The defacto complainant is the Sales Manager in the said Company and the Mill is engaged in Yarn manufacturing and distribution.

The first accused was supplying materials to the Mill and so, got acquainted with them. He introduced the other accused to the complainant Mill stating that they are also businessmen and they are intended to purchase yarn from the complainant Mill on credit basis. They also assured that they will pay the amount without any default.

3. The second respondent was stated to be a Government Servant and he has also assured that he will stood as guarantor the due payment of money, so that, the Mill can supply the Yarn on credit basis.

4. On the basis of the assurance given by all the accused persons, complainant Mill supplied yarn bales, worth about Rs.4,80,439.35/- to the accused 1 to 5. At the time of purchase, the accused paid Rs.2.50 lakhs in cash and they promised that the balance amount will be paid in due course.

5. But, inspite of passage of time, they defaulted in payment of the balance amount. Thereafter, towards discharge, the third accused issued a cheque to the complainant Company, for a sum of Rs.2,30,440/-, bearing No.258470, dated 29.06.2001. When the same was presented for collection, it was dishonoured due to 'insufficient funds'. So, the defacto complainant filed a complaint, which was registered in Crime No.525 of 2002, for the offence under Section 420 IPC. After completing the investigation, the first respondent filed a final report before the Judicial Magistrate, Rajapalayam, and the same was taken cognizance in C.C.No.410 of 2005.

6. Seeking quashment of the final report, the petitioner, who is the 5th accused before the Trial Court, has filed this petition, mainly on the ground that he is no way connected with the business affairs of the accused Nos.1 to 4 and the entire transaction took place only between the defacto complainant and the above said persons.

7. Moreover, as per the final report, no allegation of cheating is made against this petitioner. It is the further contention that the cheque alleged to have been issued by the third accused was stated to be dishonoured. So, the offence under Section 420 of IPC, will not lie.

8. After hearing the arguments of the parties, records from the Trial Court were called for. Copies of the records were submitted by the Trial Court through its letter, dated 19.02.2021. Perusal of the entire Trial Court records as well as the typed set of papers filed by this petitioner, shows that the defacto complainant Company supplied yarn on credit basis to the accused, who were stated to be running the joint business. But, no such record has been recovered by the Investigating Officer, to show that all the accused are running a joint business. Need not go into the allegation made against the other accused 1 to 4 suffice to discuss the case only with regard to the allegation made against this petitioner.

9. In the complaint, the defacto complainant has stated that the first accused introducing the other accused persons on 21.06.2021 stating that they are running yarn business jointly and they required yarn, which may be supplied by the defacto complainant on credit basis. The second accused was stated to be a Government Servant, the bill was required to be made in the name of the third accused. The first accused has undertook to ensure the due payment. On that basis, Yarn, worth about Rs.4,80,439.35/- was supplied. Due of which, Rs.2.50 lakhs was paid in cash on 21.06.2001, i.e., on the date of introduction itself. The balance amount of Rs.2,30,440/-, for which, the t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top