J.N.Hore, J. - (1.) Both the matters arise out of the same proceeding being Case No. C 1556 of 1987 under sections 120-B/420/468/471, Indian Penal Code pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 17th Court, Calcutta and they have been heard together and this judgment will govern both.
(2.) On August 20, 1987, the O.P. Manoj Kumar Chakraborty, Managing Director, Nirala Properties Private Limited, filed a petition of complaint before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta against Smt. Anima Basu, Smt. Hanshi Mukherjee (petitioners in Cr.Rev. No. 1670 of 1987) and Sri Prantosh Chakraborty (petitioner in Cr.Rev. No. 1669 of 1987) alleging commission of offences under sections 120;-B/ 420/380/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code. In the said petition of complaint it was inter alia alleged as follows: The complainant was the Managing Director of Messrs. Nirala Properties Private Ltd., with its registered office at Room No. 8-D and 8-B, Commerce House, 2-A, Ganesh Chandra A venue, Calcutta-B. The said Company carried on multifarious business including the purchase, taking on lease or otherwise acquiring and disposing of land and house properties. The accused NO.1 was a Director and the accused No.2 the Governing Director of Messrs. Circular Investment Trust Private Ltd. having its registered office at 2, Sarat Bose Road. The accused No.3 Prantosh Chakraborty was formerly a trustworthy employee of the petitioner's company and was entrusted with all papers, documents, files, vouchers including bank pass book and blank papers with signatures of the Managing Director during his tenure of service in the company for a period of four years or so. Messrs. Circular Investment Trust owned two adjacent three storied buildings at 40-A and 40-B Temple Road, Calcutta. The accused Nos. 1 and 2 having found that the aforesaid two premises were incurring heavy losses due to low income thereon, had decided to sell the two properties with tenants on as is where is basis. On or about 4th December, 1985, the accused No.3 had brought the accused Nos. 1 and 2 to the complainants office when the accused Nos. 1 and 2 had held out that they were desirous of selling aforesaid properties, and were willing to sell the same to the complainants company. On December 7, 1985 the Complainant along with others including the accused No.3, Prantosh Chakraborty had been to premised No. 40-A and 40-B, Lake Temple Road, Calcutta for inspecting The said premises. Both the accused Nos. 1 and 2 were also present. Thereafter the complainant had been to the office of the accused Nos. 1 and 2 and inspected the relevant documents. On December 10, 1985 the accused Nos. 1 and 2 had visited the complainants office with Xerox copies of documents including title deeds and had intimated their desire to finalise their terms on 14-12-1985. On December 14, 1985 the terms and conditions were agreed upon and draft copies of the same had been sent to the accused Nos. 1 and 20n 16-12-1985. On 18-12-1985 the complainant had received the said draft copies through the accused No.3. The agreement for sale had been executed on December 20, 1985 and a sum of Rs. 50,000/- was paid by the Complainants Company in favour of Circular Investment Trust as earnest money. The complainant had been allured to purchase the said properties for a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- being induced by the representation made by the accused persons and considering the deal a very lucrative one. The complainant had started negotiating with the tenant for getting vacant possession of the flats, and managed to procure vacancy of the entire first floor flat at 40-B Temple Road in occupation of Sri Niladri Chatterjee by making payment of Rs. 25,000/- in cash and thereafter acquired vacant possession of another flat on the second floor at 40-B, Lake Temple Road by making payment of Rs. 25,000/- by account payee cheque to Smt. Dipti Sen, wife and constituted attorney of the tenant, Sanjoy Sen. The complainant had started to have the title properly investigated and incurred huge expenses in the matter. Thereafter, the complainant's solicitors had in a letter, dated 25-6-1987 enclosed a draft conveyance along with a demand for the Income Tax Clearance certificate from Messrs. Circular Investment Trust. On May 7, 1987 the complainant had gone to Alipore Court with a brief case containing a file relating to the above property, and various other papers and letter-head of the company. The aforesaid brief case had been stolen from his car and a G.D. Entry to that effect had been lodged with Alipore Police Station. Pursuant to the theft of the said file the complainant had handed over the original documents relating to the said property to the accused No.3 and had directed him to make Xerox copies of the same. The accused No.3 after taking the said original documents had been absenting himself from work without any explanation. About a month after his solicitors had written to the Circular Investment, the petitioner was shocked to learn through his Solicitors that Advocate Sri Samar Kumar Basu had addressed a letter, dated July 20, 1987 to his Solicitors returning the draft conveyance and intimating that the aforesaid contract for sale of those property had been cancelled by the accused Nos. 1 and 2, for alleged violation and default on the part of the complainant, and the same had been confirmed by exchange of letters, dated 30-4-1987, and the earnest money of Rs. 50,000/- had been returned to the complainant by a cheque. The complainant had been surprised as there had been no such exchange of letters nor had the agreement been cancelled. The complainant on enquiry learnt from his Bankers that Rs. 50,000/- had been deposited in his Bank account. The complainant further discovered that the accused No.3, Prantosh Chakraborty had been engaged in a construction project of the accused No.2 and found that the original documents handed over to the accused No.3 were not to be traced.
(3.) The complainant alleged that all the aforesaid accused persons conjointly and in conspiracy and collusion with each other committed theft of those valuable documents from the registered office of the petitioners company and getting hold of the said original documents forged, manufactured and fabricated documents and used those forged documents to their benefit to sustain a claim causing wrongful loss to the complainant to the extent of Rs. 5,000/- as the accused No.2 on 18-2-1986 received a further sum of Rs. 5,000/ by Cheque No. N40/1001807322 drawn on State Bank of India, Ballygunge Branch from the complainant against the said transaction of sale and the same date another amount of Rs. 5,000/by A/c. Payee Cheque drawn on Central Bank of India, Ballygunge Branch.;