BASAB GHOSH Vs. OUTLOOK PUBLISHING INDIA PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the order dated 24.3.2009, whereby the petitioner was summoned for having committed offences punishable under Sections 408, 409, 418 & 422 of IPC.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as an Executive with the complainant/respondent, which is a Company engaged in the business of publication of various magazines such as Outlook, Outlook (Hindi), Outlook Traveler, Outlook Money, Outlook Business. The duties of the petitioner included distribution and sale of magazines published and/or distributed by the complainant to various distributors, retail venders, hawkers, small book shops, etc., and to collect money from them, principally in the States of West Bengal, Orissa, Bihar, Jharkhand and Assam. The petitioner was also responsible to maintain a true, correct and accurate account and record of the magazines returned unsold so that adjustment in respect of returned magazines could be made which calculating the money owed by the parties to whom the magazines were supplied to the complainant Company. The number of parties within the areas in which the petitioner used to operate is believed to be around 5,000, most of them being small operators, operating from kiosks, small shops, street corners, pavements, etc. It has been alleged in the complaint that on scrutiny of the amount owed to the complainant Company, by the parties to whom magazines used to be supplied, it transpired that the petitioner had failed to collect a sum which he himself represented to be about Rs.41,62,492/-. He was asked by the complainant Company to collect outstanding amounting to Rs.30,71,475/- from 16 major distributors but out of that he collected a sum of Rs.2,34,382/- and, eventually, he submitted his resignation letter dated 6.8.2008. He was thereupon asked to render true, correct and complete account of the money owed to the complainant Company for the magazines. The petitioner was also asked to render a full account of the magazines returned unsold, in stipulated manner which involved cutting-out the mast-heads of the unsold magazines and returned them to the Head Office of the complainant Company in New Delhi.

(3.) It was informed that two of its relatively bigger distributors M/s.Vishal Book Centre and M/s.Prasad News Agency informed the complainant Company that unsold portion of the magazines was controlled by the petitioner and as per system, every month they used to prepare actual Must-Head Cuttings and hand over the same to the peon of Calcutta Office along with a Must-Heads letter and the office copy of the letter was used to be acknowledged by the peon. It was further informed that thereafter the petitioner used to come to their office to finalise the claim and instruct them as regards the figures of returned magazines. If in a month, the actual Must-Head was 5,000 copies per month, he would instruct them to make claim of 3,000 copies. It was further informed to the complainant Company that the petitioner took undue advantage of the faith which the distributors had in him and the ignorance and callousness of his staff, and had shown sale graph of his territory higher than what it actually was. M/s.Prasad News Agency informed the complainant Company that a sum of Rs.4,18,352/- had been worked out for the returned magazines and the petitioner had been promising that the same would be adjusted. Thus, according the complainant, the petitioner was also making M/s. Prasad News Agency to show lower returns than the copies actually received back, thereby claiming higher than the actual sale of the magazines.