(1.) Petitioners have been impleaded as accused in a complaint filed by the second respondent under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. alleging that petitioners have committed an offence under Section 499/500 IPC. Petitioners pray that the said complaint being complaint case No. 1183/1/2003 titled J.Mitra and Co. Vs. Terumo Penpol Ltd. and Anr.?be quashed.
(2.) Gravement of the allegations against the petitioners culled out from the complainant is that the complainant and first petitioner were competitors in the same business i.e. manufacturing and supplying blood bags. A tender was floated by the Delhi State Aids Control Society, Government of NCT Delhi. Pursuant thereto complainant and first petitioner had submitted offers and in support of their respective products had furnished the requisite literature. The tender inquiry pertained to supply of blood bags. Along with the literature submitted with the offer, first petitioner had submitted a graph under the caption:- ?Is venepuncture comfortable for your donor?? Said graph illustrated that the result of a needle penetration test pertaining to the product of the complainant was 26.4 on a scale of 45 and pertaining to the product of first petitioner was 16.8. It was alleged that by showing the product of the complainant inferior to that of the first petitioner, the accused had defamed the complainant.
(3.) The venepuncture comfort in relation to needle penetration test needs to be understood and explained at this juncture.