R.D.KHARE,J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State respondent.
(2.) THE present 482, Cr.P.C. application has been filed for quashing the proceedings of criminal complaint no. 30 of 2005 re-numbered 3794 of 2005 pending before I Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad as well as staying the operation and effect of the orders dated12.1.2005, 16.3.2005 and 11.8.2006 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad, whereby summons were issued and non-bailable warrants have been issued against the applicants no. 1 to 4, who are foreign nationals and who are summoned under Sections 403, 305, 415, 418, 420, 423, 120-B and 34 IPC. Learned counsel for the applicants no. 1 to 5 has initially drawn the attention of this Court to the copy of the agreement (page 165), which was executed between M/s Sky Impex Ltd. and M/s J.C.E. Consultancy and has contended that there is no privity of contract between the accused persons sought to be summoned and the complainant, opposite party no.2, inasmuch as the accused persons are not party to the said agreement, either as buyer or purchaser, and the terms and conditions of said agreement dated 1.12.2001 would not be applicable so far as the accused persons are concerned. It is thus contended that the said agreement has been entered into between two different parties, who are independent of the accused persons and said contract was entered into at Dubai. It is next contended that even if there is breach of agreement between the parties, then too no criminal liability can be fastened for breach of any contract/terms and it would not amount to cheating as defined under Section 405 IPC.
(3.) THE attention of the Court was next drawn to the complaint filed by the complainant and the allegations made in the complaint are that M/s Sky Impex Limited, Dubai has placed an order for purchase of Coke Calcination Plant from JCE Consultancy, New Delhi on 25th November, 2001 and pursuant thereto an agreement was entered into between the M/s Sky Impex Ltd. and JCE Consultancy on 1st December, 2001. As per the said agreement M/s Sky Impex Ltd. had agreed to endorse the bills of exchange of Samsung Gulf Electronics in favour of JCE Consultancy (complainant) and alternatively M/s Sky Impex Ltd. agreed to transfer the amount directly to the JCE Consultancy. The complaint further mentions that JCE Consultancy had delivered the plant to M/s Sky Impex Ltd, which was in turn sent to Samsung Gulf Electronics and that Samsung Gulf Electronics accepted the bills of exchange dated 1st February, 2002, which was endorsed by M/s Sky Impex Ltd. in favour of M/s JCE Consultancy and the said bills of exchange was not paid upon demand and therefore the complaint was filed by the complainant.;