Honble THOMAS, J.–Leave granted.

(2). Appellant lodged an FIR with the police for the offence under Section 420, Indian Penal Code. A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court quashed the FIR on the premises that the complaint did not disclose the offence. The Division Bench reminded themselves that jurisdiction under Art. 226 of the Constitution or Sec. 482 of the Cr.P.C. ``should be exercised sparingly and with circumspection for quashing criminal proceedings. Nevertheless, learned judges found that the case on hand could not pass the test laid down by this Court in State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal (1). The appellant is obviously aggrieved by the aforesaid course of action adopted by the High Court and hence he filed the special leave petition.

(3). In the complaint filed by the appellant before the police, on the strength of which the FIR was prepared, the following averments, inter alia, were made. Appellant belongs to a company (M/s Passion Apparel Private Limited) which manufactures and exports Readymade garments. On 15.11.1994 fifth respondent (Gagan Kishore Srivastava) Managing Director of M/s. Avren Junge Mode Gumbh Haus Der Model approached the complainant for purchase of Ready

Click Here to Read the rest of this document