- (1.) The petitioner has preferred this criminal revision challenging the order dated January 27, 2009 passed by the learned Chief Judge, City Sessions Court, Calcutta in Criminal Revision No. 185 of 2008 arising out G.R. Case No. 1957 of 2001, by which the learned Judge of the court below discharged the accused persons from the criminal case.
(2.) The petitioner being the de facto complainant filed petition of complaint before the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Detective Department, Lal Bazar, Calcutta on August 7, 2001 stating, inter alia, that the petitioner, his brother and father are the directors of the company named M/s. Madan Grey Iron Casting Pvt. Ltd and that the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 being the accused of the criminal case are the directors of the company named M/s. Rose Island Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. The accused, Ram Kuber Prasad and Rakesh Prasad are the brothers of younger sister's husband of the petitioner. The eldest sister of the petitioner was also married to the cousin of the accused Ram Kuber Prasad and as such the petitioner is the close relative of the accused persons. Both the company of the petitioner and the company of the accused persons used to supply Cast Iron Sleeper Plates to the Indian Railways. The company of the petitioner supplied 603 M/T of C.S.T. 9, Sleeper Plates to North Frontier Railways and there was outstanding bill of Rs.38,20,642.46 (Rupees thirty eight lakh twenty thousand six hundred forty two and paisa forty six) only from the Railways. In view of the close relationship between the petitioner and the accused persons, the petitioner entrusted the accused Ram Kuber Prasad to pursue his outstanding dues of Rs.38,20,642.46 (Rupees thirty eight lakh twenty thousand six hundred forty two and paisa forty six) only in the office of North Frontier Railways, Guahati, Assam on behalf of the company of the petitioner. The accused, Ram Kuber Prasad collected the cheque from the office of the Railways on 14.09.1999, but did not disclose the same to the petitioner even when the petitioner was making repeated queries about the outstanding bill of Rs.38,20,642.46 (Rupees thirty eight lakh twenty thousand six hundred forty two and paisa forty six only). On 21.01.2000, the petitioner came to learn from his friend Dr. Anjan Goswami of Guahati that the cheque bearing No.099442 dated 14.09.1999 of Rs.33,00.609.00 (Rupees Thirty Three Lakh Six Hundred Nine) only had been issued in favour of the company of the petitioner and the same was drawn on Reserve Bank of India, Calcutta. On making enquiry from the Reserve Bank of India, Calcutta, the petitioner came to learn that one current account no. 1171 was opened in the name of the company of the petitioner in the Union Bank of India, Bagbazar Branch, Calcutta and the said cheque was encashed after keeping balance of Rs.2,89,984.00 (Rupes two lakh eighty nine thousand nine hundred eighty four) only in the said account. It is relevant to point out that the accused persons being close relatives of the petitioner had access to the office of the petitioner. The petitioner had filled up the account opening form for opening account of the company of the petitioner in the Union Bank of India, Bagbazar Branch, Calcutta and pasted his photograph on the said account opening form which was kept in the office of the company of the petitioner. After this incident, the petitioner searched for the said account opening form in the office but the same was found missing. There was talk of compromise between the petitioner and the accused persons and as such the petitioner agreed to withdraw the balance amount kept in the current account no. 1171 of Union Bank of India, Bagbaar Branch, Calcutta. However, no compromise took place and as such the entire incident is reported to the police with prayer to take appropriate action.
(3.) On the basis of the said petition of complaint, the police registered Amherst Street Police Station Case No. 202 dated 29.08.2001 and started investigation. Ultimately the charge-sheet was submitted against the two accused persons on 14.08.2003 under Sections 120B/419/420/467/468 of the Indian Penal Code. These two accused persons are the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 of the instant criminal revision.;