SUNIL WADHWANI Vs. J P SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, by Sunil Wadhwani, Manager (Purchase and Imports), Western Electroniks Limited, respondent no. 5, is directed against the complaint filed by the Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, against the petitioner, the said respondent, and 4 others, for offences under Section 120-B read with Sections 420/465/467/468/47l I.P.C., and Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947, and Sections 420/465/467/4681471 Indian Penal Code and Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947, and the order of the trial court summoning the petitioner ?a the complaint, as an accused person, to stand his trial for the aforesaid offences.

(2.) On the basis of information that Ashok Kumar Gupta, respondent no. 2, in the petition, and certain others, were parties to a conspiracy, to commit offences of cheating and forgery, and of use of forged documents as genuine, with a view to fraudulently obtain, on the basis of forged documents and by misrepresentation of facts, import licences and that they had pursuant to the said conspiracy, illegally obtained an import licence, which was sold for a valuable consideration to Western Electroniks Ltd., through a broker, Mool Chand Gupta, a case under the aforesaid Sections was registered, and on the conclusion of investigation, by the Central Bureau) of Investigation, the aforesaid complaint was filed in the court of Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi. One Mukesh Kumar Verma was granted pardon, in the course of investigation. In the course of the complaint, it is alleged that after Ashok Kumar Gupta and certain others had obtained the import licence, by the commission of the aforesaid offences, on the basis of fraud and forged documents, Ashok Kumar Gupta approached Western Electroniks Ltd., a joint stock company, dealing in the manufacture and sale of consumer electronics, through Mool Chand Gupta, a broker, for the sale of the licence to the company, and that the licence was eventually purchased by the company for a sum of Rs 30,0001-, which was paid by two cheques of Rs. 25,0001 and Rs. 50001- each. It further appears from the complaint that in the coutse of investigation the purchase of the aforesaid licence, and the payment of the consideration, were found duly reflected in the records of the company. It further appears that pursuant to the aforesaid licence, a letter of credit was opened by a bank, at the instance of western Electronics Ltd., but meanwhile, Mool Chand Gupta, having become suspicious about the validity of the licence, because of an exposure in another case, in winch the licence had been transferred by Ashok Kumar Gupta to another firm, Mool Chand-Gupta contacted the petitioner and suggested that the letter of credit be cancelled, if opened, on which the transaction with regard to the licence was treated as cancelled, and Moot Chand Gupta obrtained from Ashok Kumar Gupta the amount af Rs. 30,0001- which had been paid earlier by the company. Para 21 of the complaint runs thus :-

(3.) On taking cognizance of the complaint, the Court below made a cryptic order that there are "grounds to proceed against all the accused" under all the provisions, alleged in the complaint, and directed that the accused persons be summoned to stand their trial for the aforesaid offences. No witness was examined before the trial court, nor does it appear from the summoning older that the trial court examined any material apart from the complaint.