PAWAN JHA Vs. PAWAN KUMAR AGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicants, by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seek to quash the summoning order dated 14.11.2008 as well as the Criminal Complaint Case No. 1835 of 2008 Pawan Kumar Agarwal vs. Pawan Jha and others, under Sections 417 and 420 IPC pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

(2.) COMPLAINANT /respondent no. 2 filed a criminal complaint case against four named accused including the applicants in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. After recording the statement of Pawan Kumar Agarwal under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and statements of Sunder Lal Yadav and Hari Om Agrawal under Section 202 Cr.P.C., accused persons were summoned to face the trial under Sections 417 and 420 IPC vide order dated 14.11.2008 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur. Aggrieved against the same, present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was filed.

(3.) ACCORDING to the complainant, the complainant dealt with in the business of cosmetic goods. The accused persons contacted the complainant in October, 2007 and apprised him that they deal with the marketing of cosmetic goods and are working in Gleam Care Private Limited, New Delhi. Accused persons requested the complainant to sell their cosmetic goods in Uttarakhand as Carry and Forward agents. The complainant agreed to become the carry and forwarding agent of Gleam Care Private Ltd., New Delhi and further agreed to sell their products. An agreement was executed between the parties on 1st November, 2007, whereby the accused persons obtained a sum of Rs. 5 lacs from him and further agreed to pay 9 % interest per annum on the said amount on security. Condition no. 5 was also finalized between the parties, description of which condition is given in para 5 of the complaint. Accused persons dispatched the cosmetic goods worth Rs. 1,74,384/ -on 4th March, 2008, which was kept by the complainant in his go -down, but the accused persons did not came to him for sale of such cosmetic goods. Sale order was also not given to the complainant, as a consequent of which, the same could not be sold. Cosmetic goods were perishable items and therefore, the same could not be sold in the market thereafter.