ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.1056 of 2016 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Alandur, Kancheepuram District, for the offences under Sections 406, 420 and 506(i)

IPC.

2.It is the main contention of the de facto complainant that the accused had made a false representation and made to believe the complainant to supply the goods. Only on their promise and representation, the complainant had loaded the goods and the petitioners thereafter defrauded the complainant and parted with the goods. Therefore, the complaint has been filed.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the complaint is not maintainable, as it is purely a commercial transaction, therefore, there cannot be any prosecution. It is his further submission that there is no evidence to show that orders have been placed by the petitioners for such goods. Without any such orders being placed, the question of supply of goods does not arise at all. Hence, the learned counsel submitted that the entire private complaint is an abuse of process of law and his further contention is that there is no allegation in the complaint to attract the offences as against the petitioners, and prayed to quash the complaint.

4.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

5.This Court is of the view that, whether orders have been placed or not is a matter of evidence. Therefore, this Court cannot conduct a roving enquiry while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. What is required to be done is to find out whether there is any prima facie allegation to attract the offence. However, whether those allegations are true or not, is a matter of evidence, which can be gone into at the stage of trial. The very allegation in the complaint made against the petitioners is that, based on the false representation and promise made by the petitioners, the respondent was made to believe and he supplied the goods.

6.When such being the position, this Court is of the view that the same certainly falls within the ambit of Section 415 IPC in view of the illustrations under Section 415 IPC.

Illustrations (f) and (g) of Section 415 IPC reads as follows :

“(f) A intentionally deceives Z into a belief that A means to repay any money that Z may led to him and thereby dishonestly induces Z to lend him money. A not intending to repay it. A cheats.

(g) A intentionally deceives Z into a belief that A means to deliver to Z a certain quantity of indigo plant which he does not intend to deliver, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to advance money upon the faith of such delivery. A cheats; but if A, at the time of obtaining the money, intends to deliver the indigo plant, and afterwards breaks his contract and does not deliver it, he does not cheat, but is liable only to a civil action for breach of contract.”

7.In view of the above, this Court is of the view that the complaint cannot be quashed at the threshold. The evidentiary value of the same has to be gone into only at the stage of trial. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings at this stage.

8.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

Consequently, connected Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

9.At this stage, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks indulgence of this Court to dispense with the personal appearance of the petitioners. Accordingly, the personal appearance of the petitioners/accused before the trial Court is dispensed with, except for receipt of copies, answering the charges, questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C., passing of judgment, or on any other date as may be required by the trial Court.

23.11.2021 Index : Yes / No Internet: Yes Speaking/non speaking order psa/mkn To The Judicial Magistrate, Alandur, Kancheepuram District.

N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

psa/mkn

23.11.2021