The main legal point established in the judgment is that a dispute primarily civil in nature cannot be converted into a criminal offense with mala fide intention.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to call for the records culminating in FIR in Crime No.17 of 2019 on the file of the 1st respondent herein registered by the 3rd respondent herein for the alleged offence under Sections 120(b), 406, 407 and 420 of IPC and quash the same.

Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to call for the records of the 1st respondent's impugned FIR bearing Crime No.17 of 2019, dated 05.11.2019 on the file of the Central Crime Branch Police, Tirupur City and quash the same against the petitioner.)

Common Order

1. These two petitions had filed to quash the First Information Report registered in Crime No.17 of 2019 against four persons namely, (1)Boris Ostrobrod, (2) Himanshu Subhash Chandra Pant, (3) Manikandan and (4) Rayar Anand. J. for the alleged offences under Sections 120(B), 406, 407 and 420 of IPC. The impugned First Information Report has been taken up for investigation, based on the order passed under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C. by the Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tirupur.

2. The allegations made in the First Information Report are as below:

One Murugasamy, the complainant is the Proprietor of Shri Amman Knits at Tiruppur. He is assisted by his son Suresh, his relative Ramasamy and his friend P.R.Raja. He is engaged in manufacturing knitwear clothes based on the orders from Foreign Countries. One of the customers M/s Allison Garments Prodactions LLC having its office at Russia placed order on 04.07.2018 to manufacture knitwear clothes as per the given specification. On confirmation of the design and product, he manufactured knitwear clothes and shipped the materials under invoice No.SAK/040/18- 2019 dated 25.01.2019 through Shipping Agent M/s MGH Logistics Private Limited. The Shipping Agent was specifically instructed to transit the cargo through Credo Trans Limited, who is the forwarding Agent of M/s Allison Garments Prodactions LLC. A House Bill of Lading TUP 101902 dated 08.02.2019 was drawn and a copy was given to the complainant and along with the cargo, Master Bill of Lading was submitted to the Credo Trans Limited. The understanding between the complainant and the buyer was that on the arrival of cargo at Russia Port, the buyer M/s Allison Garments Prodaction LLC has to pay the value of the goods i.e. 112326.19 USD equivalent to INR 79,75,160.

3. On deposit of the said amount in the bank account maintained by the defacto complainant, he will forward the original House Bill of Lading to the buyer and the same will be presented to Credo Trans Limited, who is the Russian representative of M/s MGH Logistics Private Limited and thereafter, the buyer shall take delivery of the goods. However, the buyer did not deposit the value of the goods Rs.79,75,160/- in the defacto complainant's bank account at India. While so, he despatched the 2nd consignment under invoice No.SAK/044/18-2019 dated 01.03.2019. M/s MGH Logistics Private Limited at Tuticorin received the consignment sent by the defacto complainant from Tirupur through a lorry. While the second consignment was in transit, the defacto complainant received a copy of the Master Bill of Lading in his e-mail. He realised that contrary to the instructions to M/s MGH Logistics Private Limited, its Russia representative Credo Trans Limited had delivered the first consignment to M/s Allison Garments Prodactions LLC. The consignment has been delivered to the buyer, without production of House Bill of Lading, which is the essential document for delivery of goods.

4. Thus, the Forwarding Agent M/s MGH Logistics Private Limited along with the buyer M/s Allison Garments Prodaction LLC had conspired to cheat the defacto complainant and had taken delivery of the goods without payment for the consignment. Later, the buyer had paid a sum of Rs.57,63,812/- instead of Rs.79,75,160/-. Further, it is stated in the complaint that G.Manikandan, Manager of M/s MGH Logist