The question involved in the present case is can a firms partner prosecute another partner who is managing it with criminal liability punishable under Section 406, I. P. C. if the formers profit as is shown in the balance-sheet of the firm drawn by the latter is not disbursed to her m spite of notice of demand

2. Smt. Shushkala, opposite-party No. . 1, was partner of a firm Ms Sri Durga Das Mill situated in Mohalla Mahabirganj, Auraiya, Etawah, aloagwith Vidyadhar, Padam Dev Gupta, Smt. Sarla Porwal and Smt. Manjesh Lata, floated on 15-3-1982. The partnership deed was registered on 22-3-1982 according to which the share of Smt. Shushkala was 30%, while that of the other four partners was 10%, 25%, 20% and 15% respectively on 30-6-84 the profit payable to Smt. Shushkala came to Rs. 48,585. 88 but only 2465. 00 were paid by the other partners to Smt. Shushkala which figures were admittedly shown in the balance-sheet. In spite of oral demands and a legal notice the other partners did not pay the said balance amount. It was stated in the notice that those four have misappropriated the share of Srat. Shushkala, so much so that they have floated another firm. The above note