A S GILL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short facts of the case appears to be that the complaint being C.R. Case No.4009 of 1994 was filed by respondent No.2 against the applicant herein for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420 read with Section 34 of IPC. The accusation in the complaint is that at the time when the shares were to be sold/transferred, it was stated that the approval of Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited is only a matter of formality, but after the transfer, the approval was not received, therefore, the accusation is made by the complainant in the complaint that he has been cheated and further the allegation is of misappropriation and thereby for the offence punishable under Section 406 of IPC. It appears that as stated in the complaint at paragraphs 3 and 4, the process was issued against the petitioner. Under these circumstances, the present petition before this Court.

(2.) Heard Mr.I.H. Syed, learned Counsel for Mr.Mitul K. Shelat, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr.K.P. Raval, learned APP for the respondent State and Mr.A. Ahuja with Mr.A.D. Shah, learned Counsel for respondent No.2.

(3.) It does appear that the statement has been made in the complaint for making of representation. However, the transfer, if considered, is subject to the approval of Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited. Further, after the filing of the complaint, as per the documents produced on page 22, vide letter dated 2.12.1994 of Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited, the sanction has been granted, but with the clarification that Shri A.S. Gill and Tej Partap Singh would continue to remain as guarantors till repayment of the entire outstanding of term loan by the company. Thereafter, the additional affidavit has been filed on 14.8.2007 and the copy of the letter dated 12th October, 2000 of Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited has been produced, wherein it has been stated that the entire OTS amount has been paid and there is nothing due towards the company as on the date in respect of two term loans. The letter of Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Limited is also produced on page 63 dated 18.8.2005, wherein it has been stated that the account of the company has been adjusted and nothing is due in its account. The aforesaid would show that the sanction is accorded and it would stand operated, more particularly when on behalf of the original complainant no material is produced to controvert the same.