JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) This application is for quashing the order dated 11.2.2004
passed by Judicial Magistrate, Giridih in T.R. No. 612 of 2006 whereby
he took cognizance of offence under section 406, 420 and 120 B of the
IPC and also for quashing the order dated 30.11.2006 passed by
Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-IV, Giridih in Cr. Revision No. 93 of 2006
whereby aforesaid order dated 11.2.2004, passed by learned Judicial
Magistrate, had been confirmed.
(2.) It appears that a complaint petition filed in the court of
learned CJM, Giridih stating therein that petitioner is Proprietor and
Manager of Kaptan Hygiene Products Ltd and complainant was stockist
of said company at Giridih. It is further stated that the petitioner's
company was manufacturing washing soap. It is alleged that aforesaid
company owe a sum of Rs. 1,85,000/- of complainant. It is then alleged
that the accused/petitioner, with a view to cheat complainant made a
telephonic call and asked him to come to their Delhi office with
advance money for one truck of goods. It is further stated that during
the said telephonic conversation , accused person promised to settle
the pending claims of the complainant. It is further stated that
complainant believed on aforesaid telephonic conversation and
prepared five Demand Draft of Rs. 1,80,000/- from UCO Bank, Giridih .
Thereafter on 30.5.2002 went to the Delhi office of accused persons
along with witness Pawan Kumar Pilania. It is further stated that in the
Delhi office, accused person settled part of the claim of complainant
(to the extent of Rs. 83,750/- )and promised that the rest claim would
be settled later on. It is further alleged that on that date itself,
petitioner asked complainant to deposit money so that one truck of
goods can be sent to the complainant. Believing on the promise made
by the accused/petitioner, complainant handed over Rs. 1,80,000/-
through five bank drafts and took receipt thereof. It is then alleged that
thereafter complainant returned to Giridih, but the consignment never
reached. Later on, complainant came to know that the petitioner had
closed their factory from before 30.5.2002 and same fact was
concealed by petitioner. Thus accused/petitioner had intention to
deceive the complainant from before and by doing so they cheated
complainant and took Rs. 1,80,000/- from him. Accordingly, it is alleged
that the offence under section 420, 406 read with section 120B of the
IPC is made out against the accused/petitioner.
(3.) It appears that complainant examined himself on S.A. and also
examined witnesses in support of his case. The learned judicial
magistrate after considering the materials prima facie come to the
conclusion that the offences under section 420, 406 read with section
120 B of the IPC are made out accordingly vide order dated 11.2.2004
he took cognizance of the offences and issued process against the
accused/petitioner.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.