JUDGEMENT
AMARESHWAR SAHAY, J. -
(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) IN the present application the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 17.3.2005 taking cognizance of the offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 469 and 471/34 of the
Indian Penal Code, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro and also the entire criminal
proceeding being C.P. Case No. 325 of 2002 pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro.
The relevant facts are that the O.P. No. 2 herein, namely, Bierndra Singh filed a complaint case before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro against the three persons namely, Suresh Kumar
Tekriwal, the petitioner herein, C. Ravi, the then Manager of Vijaya Bank, Naya More Branch,
Bokaro Steel City and H.D. Hedge, Manager, Vijaya Bank, Naya More Branch, Bokaro Steel City.
The said complaint was registered as C.P. Case No. 325/2002.
(3.) THE case of the complainant as stated in the complaint petition in short is that the complainant was an employed person, the accused Suresh Kumar Tekriwal, i.e. the petitioner herein,
approached him in the year 1990 and proposed to start a joint business and thereby induced the
complainant to invest amount in their business. The complainant believing the statement of the
accused Suresh Kumar Tekriwal in good faith agreed to do partnership business with him and
invested a huge amount in the business. He entered into the business of partnership and several
partnership firms were constituted between the complainant and the accused Suresh Kumar
Tekriwal, including M/s. Savita Iron and Steel Processor and in due course of time, other eight
partnership firms were also constituted. The names of which have been mentioned in the complaint
petition. It is alleged that according to the terms of partnership agreement, relating to Akashay
Steels, as account was opened in Vijaya Bank, Naya More Branch, Bokaro Steel City which was to
be operated jointly under the joint signature of both the partners but it is said that the accused No.
2, C. Ravi being the Manager of Vijaya Bank at the relevant time accepted the cheques under the single signature of Suresh Kumar Tekriwal and thereby allowed withdrawal of Rs. 17.20.789.00.00
under different 48 numbers of Cheques on different dates in between 3.8.1999 to 28.2.2000. It is
alleged that both the accused persons conniving with each other and in order to misappropriate
the amount, with ulterior motive put the complainant in heavy loss. The accused Suresh Kumar
Tekriwal withdrew such huge amount from the said Vijaya Bank with the connivance of the Branch
Manager of the Bank.
It is further alleged that some dispute arose in the partnership business relating to M/s.
Akshya Steel and M/s. Vishwananth Transport and thereby in pursuance of one of the
conditions of the partnership the matter was referred to the Arbitrator who passed an
award on 20.11.2000. However, it ended in a compromise between the partners on
1.4.2002. It is further alleged that even after filing claim before the Arbitrator the business of the partnership firm was continuing and income derived from such business
were not included in the arbitration award. It is said that accused No. 1 Suresh Kumar
Tekriwal, who was dealing with all the transactions, in violation of the partnership
agreement and during the pendency and after the arbitration award, received a total
sum of Rs. 15.26.00,000.00 . It is said that as per Clause 13 of the Arbitration clause
whatever amount were to be received which were not included in the arbitration dispute
was to be deposited in the joint account of both the parties for distribution of the
amount in equal share. But it is said that the accused Suresh Kumar Tekriwal received
the amount mentioned above on different dates but he did not deposit the same in the
joint account and thereby misappropriated the share of the complainant to the tune of
Rs. 7,63,00,000.00.00 . The accused Suresh Kumar Tekriwal did not inform the
complainant before receipt of the same amount. Apart from the aforesaid amount it is
said that the accused Suresh Kumar Tekriwal received a sum of Rs. 26,51,00,000.00.00
on account of liasoning work which were not included in the arbitration dispute. The
details of those amounts have been mentioned in the complaint petition.
It is further alleged in the complaint petition that the complainant was entitled to 50% of
the amount mentioned in the complaint petition, which was misappropriated by the
accused Suresh Kumar Tekriwal. There is also allegation in the complaint against the
accused Suresh Kumar Tekriwal that he committed forgery in respect of purchase of
land at Raipur.
In view of the above allegations it was said by he complainant in the complaint petition that the
accused No. 1 Suresh Kumar Tekriwal dishonesty deliberately misappropriated the amount and
also committed the offence of forgery.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.