BASANT KUMAR SAHOO Vs. STATE OF C.G.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"), the petitioner has prayed for quashing of Criminal Case No. 2164/04, wherein and whereby, the learned Magistrate, vide its order dated 9.9.2004 has taken cognizance of the complaint filed by respondent No. 2- M/S. Mohan Feeds and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., registering offence under Sections 406, 420 & 422 of the IPC and issued summons. Alleging non-payment of outstanding dues to the tune of Rs. 2,52,989/- by the petitioner against supply of cattle feeds by the complainant, a complaint under Section 200 of the Code was filed by respondent No. 2-M/s. Mohan Feeds & Chemical Pvt. Ltd. against the petitioner, who is said to be proprietor of M/s. Kalinga Traders. In the complaint, it has been alleged that the petitioner/accused was appointed as dealer of the complainant company for operating complainant's business in the Cuttack area of State of Orissa. It is further alleged that under various bills, from time to time, complainant sent through transport upon sale, cattle feed of the value of Rs. 2,52,989/- to the petitioner, but the payment against such supply was not made. The complainant sent a letter on 31.8.2001 requesting for payments, but, no payments were made. It is further stated in the complaint that on various dates, complainant supplied against advance payment, cattle feed to the petitioner/accused. Further allegation is that on demand of payment repeatedly, the petitioner/accused assured stating that it is taking goods and also making payments, therefore, the payment of Rs. 2,52,989/- would be made later on, but, the payments were not made and as and when he was contacted, the payments was avoided. When the complainant sent his representative - Navneet Mathur for getting payment of the said balance amount to Cuttack, the petitioner stated that the goods as stated to have been supplied and sold have not been purchased nor such goods have been sent to the petitioner, therefore, question of payments against those supplies does not arise, thereby, the petitioner acted fraudulently and dishonestly. It is also alleged that the petitioner is the authorized dealer and having not made payment against the good supplied, the petitioner has also committed criminal breach of trust. On the aforesaid allegations, the complainant sought prosecution of the petitioner for commission of offence under Sections 405, 406, 409, 415, 420 & 422 of the IPC.

(2.) In support of complaint, the complainant examined its Director-Manmohan Mathur as P.W.-1 and Rupesh Rawat as P.W.-2.

(3.) Vide its order dated 9.9.2004, the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the complaint by registering offences under Sections 406, 420 & 422 of the IPC against the petitioner and issued summons for appearance.