DEEPAK KUMAR P. SHENVI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) According to the petitioner, he being proprietor of the business concern M/s. Meghadoot Exim International, doing the business of purchase and sale of Iron Ore, gave an offer to one Srivatsava Sunkara, for sale of 50,000 tons of Iron Ore and in pursuance thereof, an agreement was entered into in the name of Sree Srinivasa Padmavathi Realtors Pvt. Ltd., for purchase of Iron Ore from the petitioner, by paying Rs. 15,00,000/- and thereafter, Srivatsava Sunkara approached him and informed that he himself is purchasing the Iron Ore and the amount will be directly credited by the purchaser to whom he has agreed to sell the same. According to the petitioner, the agreement holder did not purchase the Iron Ore, since the price of Iron Ore went up and he gave a written instruction to repay the advance amount and being a straight business, he agreed for the same. According to the petitioner, he received a sum of Rs. 6,72,00,000/- in his account, on different dates, from an entity called Sumitra Apartments. According to the petitioner, he transferred all the amount received by him to Sumitra Apartments and to various persons as per the direction of Srivatsava Sunkara in the first instance, but later, he transferred the amount by deducting some amount towards the Income Tax. According to the petitioner, since the Lokayukta of Karnataka filed a complaint against Metachem Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd., - respondent No. 4, for illegal selling of Iron Ore, to avoid the case against Metachem Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd., respondents 4 and 5 started pressurizing him to manipulate certain documents and also to reverse certain transaction and since he did not agree for the same, respondents 4 and 5 filed two separate criminal complaints in the Court situated at Pune with mala fide intention to extort money from him and also to transfer the criminal liability of the illegal business of iron ore by the complainants and that acting on the complaint filed by the respondent No. 4, Chatushrungi Police Station, registered FIR No. 118/2011 and thereafter, acting on the complaint lodged by the respondent No. 5, the said Police registered FIR No. 206/2011. Respondents 4 and 5 having jointly filed O.S. No. 1376/2010 in the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Pune, seeking recovery of the amount, petitioner filed the written statement and contested the suit. Alleging that the respondents 4 and 5 though have not got any cause of action to file the criminal complaints in Pune, have filed the said complaints, with frivolous allegations, purposely to harass him, these writ petitions were filed to transfer the said complaints, to Ankola Police Station or Karwar Police Station in Uttar Kannada District, Karnataka State and to prohibit the Inspector, Chatushrungi Police Station, Pune, from taking any steps in respect of the said complaints registered in FIR Nos. 118/2011, dated 05.03.2011 and 206/2011, dated 21.04.2011 and for grant of consequential reliefs. Metachem Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd., respondent No. 4 herein, having filed a private complaint, registered as RCC No. 813/2011 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class (Court No. 9), Pune, against Meghadoot Exim International, petitioner herein and Srivatsava Sunkara and seven others, learned Magistrate issued a direction under S. 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to Chatushrungi Police Station, for investigation and to submit report. Thereupon, investigation having commenced, FIR No. 118/2011 was registered, for the offences punishable under Ss. 406, 420, 467, 471, 472, 474, 425, 34 and 120(B) of IPC.

(2.) Mr. Akbar Sayyad Mohammad Arabian, respondent No. 5 herein, having filed a private complaint, registered as RCC No. 1387/2011 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class (Court No. 9), Pune, against Meghadoot Exim International, petitioner herein and Srivatsava Sunkara and seven others, learned Magistrate issued a direction under S. 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to Chatushrungi Police Station, for investigation and to submit report. Thereupon, investigation having commenced, FIR No. 206/2011 was registered, for the offences punishable under Ss. 406, 420, 427, 34 and 120(B) of IPC.

(3.) Sri. M.S. Harish Kumar, learned advocate contended that all the transactions including the purchase and sale of goods was done in Karnataka by the complainants and there being no specific allegation in the complaints, as to where, how and when the cheating or forgery of documents was done and also that there being no allegation that it was done within the jurisdiction of the Court of JMFC (Court No. 9), Pune, merely because the offices of the complainants are located in Pune, the Court or the Police in Pune, do not have jurisdiction to commence the investigation in the matter, as none of the offences are alleged to have been committed in Pune. He submitted that the complainants, using their political influence on the Police, have filed the private complaints in the Court at Pune, only to illegally extract money from the petitioner and thereby, the complainants have abused process of the Court and the Court at Pune has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaints. Learned counsel further submitted that the complainants had obtained the LC and cash credit facility from the Banks to do Iron Ore business in Belekeri and that the complainants had offices and plots in Belekeri and their company officials and supervisors were based in Belekeri during the period when the alleged crime had taken place and the complainants purchased the Iron Ore in Karnataka and sold it in Belekeri and at no point of time the Iron Ore was either transported or taken to Pune and the shipment of the Iron Ore was done from Belekeri Port by the complainants. He submitted that the petitioner received money in Syndicate Bank at Karwar and he reverted back the money from the same Bank and the petitioner had never been to Pune and never made any phone call to complainants and never met them before or during the period when the alleged crime had taken place and in the circumstances, the JMFC Court (Court No. 9), Pune and Chatushrungi Police have committed illegality in entertaining the complaints against the petitioner and in embarking upon an investigation which is clearly in excess of the jurisdiction vested in them under the provisions of the Cr.P.C. He submitted that, since entire transaction upon which the complaints are purportedly based had taken place in Karwar/Belekeri in Ankola Taluk, Karnataka and not at any other place outside Karnataka much less at Pune or any other place in the State of Maharashtra, the complaints could not/ought not have been entertained by the JMFC Court in Pune, Maharashtra State. Learned counsel submitted that the jurisdiction, if any, to investigate into the contents of the complaints is with the Police and Courts in Karwar/Ankola and the action taken by the Police of Chatushrungi Station in Pune being clearly oppressive and malafide, sought allowing of the writ petitions, by placing reliance on the decision in the case of Navinchandra N. Majithia Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2000 AIR(SC) 2966