SHYAM KISHORE MATHUR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of FIR No. 133 of 2003 registered at Police Station Connaught Place under Sections 406/420/120B IPC. One of the grounds on which quashing is sought is that the Petitioner is not in any way connected with the company Aapka Bazar Jaipur Ltd. ( company ) in which his son is the Managing Director. Yet the Respondent No. 2 complainant and several others like him who invested moneys for the purposes of obtaining franchisee have also named the Petitioner in the criminal case. Counsel for the Petitioner further states that an enquiry made with the Registrar of Companies revealed that from the time of its incorporation the Petitioner here was never a Director of the company in question. While it is not denied that there are numerous other FIRs pending against the Petitioner at the instance of other complainants who have similarly alleged to have been cheated by the company, it is argued that this being the first FIR, if the Petitioner is found not connected with the company in any manner whatsoever, he would get the benefit of that finding in the other FIRs also.

(2.) It is informed by the counsel for the Respondent No.2 that in respect of the present FIR, a charge sheet was filed and an order framing charge has also been passed by the trial court. Charges have been framed against the Petitioner. The trial has also commenced. Three witnesses including the complainant have been examined.

(3.) The above facts are not denied by the counsel for the Petitioner. In fact counsel for the Petitioner further states that the revision petition filed by the Petitioner challenging the order framing charge was also dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and that order became final.