NAGIN KOTHARI AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANOTHER
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Nagin Kothari And Another
State of Uttarakhand and another
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) The applicants, by means of present application / petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seek to quash the cognizance and summoning order dated 06.08.2003, passed by Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, whereby said Court has taken cognizance against the applicants in criminal case no. 166 of 2006, captioned as Pawan Kumar vs Nagin Kothari and others, under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC, registered with police station Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar.
(2.) Respondent no. 2 filed a complaint against five accused persons, including the applicants, complaining offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC against them. After recording statements under Sections 200 and 202 of Cr.P.C., accused persons were summoned to face the trial for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 of IPC. An application under Section 245 of Cr.P.C. was moved on behalf of accused persons Nagin Kothari and Jai Kothari for their discharge, which was not accepted by learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, vide order dated 09.10.2006. Aggrieved against said order, a revision was preferred by Nagain Kothari and Jai Kothari. Said revision was dismissed as premature, vide order dated 01.09.2007, by learned Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar. The applicants, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. have, therefore, made a prayer for quashing the cognizance and summoning order dated 06.08.2003 as well as the order dated 01.09.2007, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar.
the complaint, it was alleged that the complainant was the Director of Jain Medicare Pvt. Ltd., Kashipur, Udham Singh Nagar. Applicant no. 1 Nagin Kothari was the Chairman of M/s Panjon Ltd., Indore. Applicant no. 2 Jai Kothari was the General Manager (Marketing) in M/s Panjon Ltd. Accused no. 4 and 5 (both non-applicants) were respectively the Regional Sales Manager and Area Sales Manager of M/s Panjon Ltd., Indore. Para no. 3 of the complaint assumes significance, in as much as, the entire allegations were levelled against the Regional Sales Manager and Area Sales Manager (accused nos. 4 and 5). It was alleged that on 07.08.2001, Manish Singhal (accused no. 4) and Pawan Vats (accused no. 5) came to the firm of the complainant at Kashipur. They wanted to appoint the complainant the Authorized Consignee Agent of M/s Panjon Ltd. Consequently, on the basis of their negotiations, a Fax was sent informing that Jain Medicare Pvt. Ltd. was being appointed as Consignee Agent of M/s Panjon Ltd. It was said in para no. 4 of the complaint that the complainant gave a draft of Rs. 2,26,251/- to the representatives of the company. Complainant gave the draft in the capacity of Consignee Agent of M/s Panjon Ltd. When the complainant did not receive the consignment, he wrote to M/s Panjon Ltd. Complainant also contacted M/s Panjon Ltd., but to no avail. An allegation was also made against the accused persons that they have dishonestly induced the complainant to part with the money to the tune of more than Rs. 3,00,000/- and did not send the consignment.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.