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

2005 Supreme(MP) 20

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH (INDORE BENCH)
S.L. Kochar, J.
Set Discovery Pvt. Ltd and others
Vs.
Shashikant S/o Padmakar Kudroli
Misc. Cri. Case No. 3430 of 2004
Decided On: 04.01.2005

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff:S.C. Bagadia, Senior Advocate and Saboo
For Respondents/Defendant: R.D. Goyal

The court emphasized that the civil and criminal matters can proceed simultaneously, and the mere existence of a civil remedy does not absolve the accused from criminal action if the complaint discloses a prima facie case.

Headnote:

Criminal Complaint - Quashing - Indian Penal Code - Sections 406, 418, 420, 467, 468, 120-B - The court discussed the allegations under sections 406 and 420 read with section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and the legal provisions related to quashing criminal proceedings at the initial stage.

Fact of the Case:

The non-applicant/complainant filed a complaint against the applicants under sections 406, 420, 467, 468, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, alleging cheating and fraud in a business dispute related to the distribution of satellite television channels.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that there was sufficient material to make out a prima facie case for taking cognizance by the Magistrate and issuing process against the applicant No. 1-Company and applicant No. 2, its president, as well as the applicant No. 6-distributor of the company in Indore. However, there was no prima facie material available to proceed with the criminal complaint against the rest of the applicants.

Issues: The main issue was whether the allegations in the complaint disclosed a prima facie case for taking cognizance and issuing process against the applicants under the relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the learned Magistrate is required to consider the allegations mentioned in the complaint and the statements of the witnesses recorded under section 200 and 202, Criminal Procedure Code, at the time of taking cognizance and issuing processes.

Final Decision: The petition was allowed in part, and the court directed that the learned trial Court should not be influenced by any observation made by the High Court in the order.

ORDER

S.L. Kochar, J.

1. The applicants have filed this petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the criminal complaint case No. 518/04 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Indore. The complaint has been filed by the non-applicant/complainant under sections 406, 418, 420, 467, 468 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Trial Magistrate after recording the statements of the complainant and his witnesses under section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code registered the complaint only under sections 406 and 420 read with section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and issued process against the applicants under section 204 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

2. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that a bare reading of the complaint would show that even the allegations stated in the complaint even if are taken at their face value, no offence whatsoever is made out against the applicants. According to the applicants, the dispute appears to be of a civil nature and the non-applicant has maliciously attempted to cloak the said dispute into a criminal case only to browbeat, pressurize and coerce the applicants. It has also been submitted that the Non-applicant/complainant has suppressed the material facts from the Court below. The non-applicant, on 29-8-2002, filed a suit against M/s Star India Pvt. Ltd. and the applicant No. 6 (Distributor of applicant No. 1-Compnay) for a declaration on the same cause of action. In the said suit, M/s Star India Pvt. Ltd. filed an application under section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, stating the fact that there is an arbitration agreement between the parties and as such, the suit could not be continued. The said application was allowed by the lower Court on 11-2-2004. Against the said order, the non-applicant has preferred an appeal and the said appeal (No. 1/2004) is still pending before the Second Addl. District Judge, Indore. The learned counsel has filed a copy of the complaint (Annexure A/1), copies of proceedings as Annexure-A/2 copy of the statements of the Non-applicant and his witnesses recorded under section 200, Criminal Procedure Code (Annexure-A/3) and the copy of the appeal memo and the order passed by the trial Court collectively marked as Annexure-A/4. It is contended that the applicant No. 1 M/s Set Discovery Pvt. Ltd. is a Private Ltd. Company and is carrying on the business, inter alia collection of subscription of revenue through distributing Satellite Television Channels in India and the applicants No. 2 to 5 and 7 are senior employees of the applicant No. 1-Company and the applicant No. 6 is a Distributor and the applicant No. 8 is an employee of the applicant No. 6-Distributor. The main thrust of the argument of learned counsel for the applicants is that the dispute between the applicant-company and the non-applicant is of civil nature and to resolve the same, in the agreement arbitration clause is provided. For that purpose, learned Civil Judge Class I Indore has also passed the order directing the Non-applicant to lodge his grievance before the Arbitrator as per Arbitration Clause in the agreement, but the complainant has maliciously filed this complaint with an ulterior motive just to harass the applicants though no criminal case is made out against the applicants. Learned counsel placed reliance on the Supreme Court Judgments passed in the case of Punjab National Bank and Others v. Surendra Prasad Sinha, 1992 Cri.LJ. 2916 and State of West Bengal v. Swapan Kumar Guha and Others, 1982 (1) SCC 561.

3-4. According to complaint filed by the Non-applicant, the non-applicant is the partner of partnership firm M/s Savera and is dealing in the business of Cable T.V. by providing connections to its subscribers for viewing the programmes on Television. The applicant No. 1 Set Discovery Pvt. Ltd. is a company dealing in the name and style of Sony Package, Sony Channels etc. and distributing satellites









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