PDP INTERNATIONAL Vs. STATE & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rejection of petitioner's application filed under Section 156(3) of Cr. P.C. is under challenge in this petition. Vide order of 20th March, 2013, trial court while taking note of the law on the subject has rejected petitioner's application for registration of FIR by holding as under:

(2.) Petitioner's counsel has relied upon decisions rendered in Aleque Padamsee and Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., 2007 6 SCC 171, Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., 2008 7 SCC 164, Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. and Ors., 2007 13 JT 466 and Skipper Beverages Pvt. Ltd. v. State, 2001 59 DRJ 129to contend that the order passed was bad in law.

(3.) Upon hearing and on perusal of the impugned order, the detailed status report, petitioner's complaint of 9th December, 2010 (Annexure P-3 colly) and the decisions cited, I find that in view of the nature of allegations levelled in this complaint as well as the subsequent complaints of 24th January, 2012 and 7th May, 2012, it is disclosed that there is an apprehension of the accused manipulating the bills etc. and it prima facie appears that the dispute relates to accounting for the entries and seeking explanation from the accused. However, instant case does not appear to be one which calls for registration of an FIR on the basis of complaints (Annexure P-3 colly) as petitioner can always substantiate the allegations levelled in the aforesaid complaints and police investigation is uncalled for. The aforesaid decisions relied upon by petitioner's counsel are of no avail to the case of petitioner as the allegations levelled in the complaints do not prima facie disclose a cognizable offence. Finding no illegality in the impugned order, this petition is dismissed while refraining to comment upon the merits of case, lest it may prejudice petitioner at trial.