JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Parties hereto admittedly had been carrying on commercial
transactions. Appellant herein was an authorised dealer of Hindustan Lever
Limited. In connection with the said business transactions, appellant
allegedly was required to deliver to the second respondent Form IX-C
prescribed in terms of Bihar Sales Tax Rules. The Second respondent herein
filed a complaint petition alleging commission of offence under Section 427,
384 and 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code, inter alia, holding :
"That it is not out of place to mention here that the
company at the time of agreement so took place
between complainant and Hindustan Levar got
signed of the complainant over certain plain and
printed papers saying that there are the formality of
the organization, which is required to be fulfilled
as such if the company try to take any advantage
from the said papers the same would not be
binding upon the complainant, as the complainant
was not made aware from the contents of the
alleged documents and the signatures of the
complainant do not come within the definition of
execution.
That as per the requirement of the law stipulated
by the rule 12 of sub-rule (2) (sic) of Bihar Finance
Act, 1981 it is the obligatory duty of the selling
dealer to furnish a declaration in writing to the
purchasing dealer known as form IX-C obtained
from prescribed authority for the exemption of the
sales tax over the turn over of the purchasing
dealer.
XXX XXX XXX
That the conduct of the accused of this case put
complainant in great inconvenience, mental agony
and financial despair and caused damage to his
business reputation.
XXX XXX XXX
That the accused always kept proposal before the
complainant to continue business with the
company and as the complainant refused to join
with them after 1999 and as such the accused did
not supply the said form IX-C to the complainant
only with the mala fide and dishonest intention
which caused damage to the complainant."
(3.) A Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura, upon examining the complaint on
oath and upon taking statements of the witnesses purported to have found
existence of a prima facie case for taking cognizance under Section 420 of
the Indian Penal Code against the appellants herein. Summons were
directed to be issued. They filed an application for quashing of the said
criminal proceedings before the High Court of Judicature at Patna in terms
of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. By reason of the
impugned judgment, a learned Single Judge of the said Court dismissed the
said petition opining :
"Admittedly, the petitioners were the carrying and
forwarding agents of the Company and in that
capacity they perhaps were instrumental in
forwarding the articles to the complainant. They
cannot escape from the liability of undergoing
criminal proceedings.
So far as the Petitioners' contention on the dispute
being a civil one is concerned, I am unable to
agree with the assertions since from the facts made
out a definite criminal liability is made out.";
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.