GURJEET SINGH JOHAR Vs. STATE OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER, a chartered accountant, impleaded as accused No. 3 in a complaint filed by respondent No. 2 under Sections 405, 406, 409, 415, 417, 418 and 420 IPC seeks quashing of the complaint as also the summoning order dated 31. 10. 2000.

(2.) I note that vide summoning order dated 31. 10. 2000, learned Metropolitan Magistrate has directed that the accused persons are being summoned for offences under sections 406/418/420/34 IPC.

(3.) M/s. Pertech Computers Ltd. has been impleaded as accused No. 1. One Dadan bhai, stated to be the Chairman of accused no. 1 has been impleaded as accused No. 2. Petitioner has been impleaded as accused no. 3. It is stated in the complaint that state Bank of Travancore is a body corporate constituted under the State Bank of India Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959 and carries on banking business. That since 1990, the complainant had been sanctioning credit facilities to accused No. 1 to enable said accused to meet its working capital requirements. That last sanction for the credit facilities was granted on 29. 3. 1997 with cash credit limit of Rs. 343 lacs and working capital loan of Rs. 1032 lacs. That when credit facilities were advanced, accused No. 1 was represented by accused no. 2. That to avail of the cash credit facilities, accused No. 1 executed an agreement for cash credit on 29. 3. 1997 pertaining to hypothecation of its assets as also another similar agreement of even date pertaining to hypothecation of goods.