LAWS(UTN)-2011-9-4

SUBHANKAR GANGULY Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

Decided On September 27, 2011
SUBHANKAR GANGULY Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this criminal miscellaneous application moved u/s 482 Cr.P.C., a prayer has been made to quash the order of cognizance dated 09.10.2007 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar in complaint case no.3619 of 2007, Mahendra Pal Singh Vs. T. Ishikawa and another. The said order was passed by learned Magistrate taking cognizance for the offence of Section 406 IPC against the petitioner Subhankar Ganguly and Mr. T. Ishikawa.

(2.) Having heard the learned counsel of both the parties, it appears that an agreement dated 10.1.2006 was entered into between the complainant Mahendra Pal Singh, Partner of M/s Sant Auto Sales, Haridwar and Yamaha Motors India Pvt. Ltd./Yamaha Motor India Sales Private Limited. M/s Sant Auto Sales is a dealer of Two-Wheeler Auto Bikes while M/s Yamaha Motors Company Ltd. is the manufacturer. For securing the dealership of Yamaha Motors Pvt. Ltd., an amount of Rs.3.00 lacs, as security deposit, was made by M/s Sant Auto Sales and the dealership was awarded to him for selling the Two-wheelers and its spare parts in Haridwar. Within a span of 1 year or so, the business transactions between the duo became sour and the dealership was broken. So, M/s Santo Auto Sales sought refund of his deposit. Out of the said amount of Rs.3.00 lacs, only Rs.2.00 lacs were returned. Anyhow, Rs.1.00 lacs nay the amount of Rs.87,788/- for some other consideration was left with Yamaha Motors Pvt. Ltd. to be paid to M/s Sant Auto Sales, which they made a default.

(3.) Deeming it as a criminal breach of trust on the part of company, because of default in returning the amount, respondent no.2-Mahendra Pal Singh, Partner, Sant Auto Sales filed a complaint against T. Ishikawa, Managing Director and the petitioner Subhankar Ganguly, Assistant Manager of the Company for the offence of Sections 406/420 IPC. The Magistrate, after recording the statement u/s 200 Cr.P.C. and perusing the other papers, denied to take cognizance in the matter and dismissed the complaint u/s 203 Cr.P.C. on dated 2.8.2007.