- (1.) PALOK Basu, J. This application under Section 482, Cr. P. C. has been filed by K. C. Kalia and Indra P. Choudhri challenging the process issued by the C. J. M. , Aligarh, in Criminal Case No. 1432 of 1982 whereby they have been summoned under Sections 406/420, I. P. C.
(2.) IT appears that a complaint was filed by Krishna Kumar Navman against the two applicants which has become case No. 1432 of 1982 in the Court of the C. J. M. , Aligarh alleging therein, inter alia the following facts. The complainant has a reputed shop of exercise books on copies in Aligarh. He deposited Rs. 50,000 as security with the accused applicants for supplying various goods. After getting the said deposits as security the applicants did not honour the orders. On several occasions the money was demanded as well as security was sought to be refunded but that was also not done. On some occasions letters were written and notices were served. It is stated in paragraphs 10 and 11 that some wrong bills were shown in order to adjust the accounts which was wrongly maintained by the applicants. It is detailed as to how, according to the complainant, a sum of Rs. 11,809 would remain outstanding against the said bill. From those facts the complainant concludes that the applicants had mal-intentions from the very beginning when they obtained the security from the complainant and their intentions being always had they should be tried under Section 406/420, I. P. C. by the Sessions Judge. The summoning order was challenged by the applicants before the Sessions Judge, who has dismissed the revision by his order dated 28-4-1983; hence this application.
(3.) SRI P. Krishna, learned counsel for the applicant and SRI R. P. Goel, learned counsel for the opposite parties have been heard at length. The entire material has been perused. From the averments contained in the complaint itself, it cannot be said that there was no business transaction between the applicants and the complainant. In this connection reference was rightly made to the notice that was served upon the applicants annexed to the counter-affidavit. In the said notice it has been averred in paragraph 6 that goods worth Rs. 70,000 and odd lad already been furnished and supplied by the applicants which had been distributed in turn by the complainant to his other Distributors. It has been specifically said that there was no error in the said notice that the accounts suggested or given by the accused-applicants was not a correct re production. An alternative accounts was suggerted in the legal notice. On the strength of these facts it was rightly argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that this case raises civil dispute and under no circumstances can it be referred that the applicants had evil mind at the time of entering into the contract with the complainant. It is well settled law that impersonation or misrepresentation of facts, if any, has to be done at the time of entering into contract in order to attract the mischief of Section 420/419, Cr. P. C. so far Section 406, I. P. C. is concerned, on the facts of the instant case the ingredients are not complete. In view of the above discussion it cannot be said that from the allegations made in the complaint an offence under Section 406/420,i. P. C. is made out.;