Vijay Lakshmi, J. - (1.) The applicant by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with prayer to quash the summoning order dated 1.5.2012 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar in Criminal Case No. 3921 of 2012 ( State of U.P. v. Lourenco D' Souza) under Sections 420, 406, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station 58 Noida, district Gautambudh Nagar arising out of Case Crime No. 1085 of 2011.
(2.) As no one appeared on behalf of opposite party no. 2 despite personal service of notice on him as long back as on 30.9.2012 and no counter affidavit was filed on behalf of opposite party no. 2. I heard Sri Dilip Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the applicant and Sri L.D. Rajbhar, learned A.G.A. representing the State. Perused the record.
(3.) Some background facts, in brief, are that the opposite party no. 2 used to deal in the business of manufacture and export of garments from its factory situated at Noida, namely M/s. Valencia Apparels through the applicant who worked as agent between opposite party no. 2 and the buyer companies, mostly foreign companies. On 8.3.2008 the opposite party no. 2 received a purchase order from United Kingdom (England) for a total price of £ 19890 (pounds) which was at that time equivalent to Rs. 15 lacs. The opposite party no. 2 prepared the goods in time and thereafter, the Quality Audit Manager (Q.A. Manager) inspected the goods and the goods were sent abroad to be delivered to the buyer doing business in the name of Design Archives at U.K. On 27.5.2008 the opposite party no. 2 presented the bill of exchange in the bank. However, when even after the expiry of the fixed period, the bill was not paid, the opposite party no. 2 contacted the applicant, who was the agent, through whom the entire business transaction had been made. The applicant assured him about the payment. But, the payment was not made by the U.K. company. The opposite party no. 2 waited till August, 2008. When the amount still remained unpaid, he again contacted the applicant and asked him to take legal action against the U.K. company. Thereafter, the buyer company credited only £ 6399 (pounds) into his account. Meanwhile, the opposite party no. 2 also applied for the claim through E.C.G.C. (Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd.). In pursuance of which Rs. 8,37,363/- were paid to him by E.C.G.C. on 18.12.2008. The entire business transaction being made through the applicant (agent), the opposite party no. 2 lodged an F.I.R. against the applicant on 2.11.2011 at P.S. Sector- 58 Noida, Gautambudh Nagar, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 406, 504 and 506 I.P.C. alleging that when the money was not paid by the U.K. company to him and he asked the agent (applicant) for payment of remaining amount, the applicant misbehaved with him shouting with the words TERA MAAL KHARAB THAA IS SE ZYADA PAISE NAHI BANTE HAI and thereafter using abusive language, the applicant pushed him out uttering SAALE TERE SE JO KIYA JAYE, KARE LE, TUJHE ISKE ALAWA EK RUPIYA BHI NAHI MILEGA;