KAVITA MALHOTRA Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the impugned order dated 17.11.2005 and all the proceedings in pursuance there to in Criminal Case No. 751 of 2005, Rohit Singhal Vs. Deepak Malhotra and others pending before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pauri Garhwal.

(2.) BRIEF facts for the disposal of this petition are that the complainant Rohit Singhal is the younger brother of Rajat Singhal who is the Director of M/s Kamakhya Ispat & Finance Pvt. Ltd., Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal and the present applicant No. 2 Deepak Malhotra was a chartered accountant of the said firm. The applicant No. 1 -Smt. Kavita Malhotra is the wife of the applicant No. 2 -Deepak Malhotra. The present applicants came to Moradabad on 5th April 1998 and made a request to Shri Ashok Singhal, father of the complainant -Rohit Singhal to become the Director of M/s Vaibhav Steels Pvt. Ltd., Kotdwar. Shri Ashok Singhal shown his inability to became the Director of that company. Thereafter, on 07.05.1999 a notice was received from Ashok Gupta belonging to Ghaziabad pretending himself to be the steel supplier addressed to Rohit Singhal as a Director of M/s Vaibhav Steels Pvt. Ltd., Kotdwar and he demanded the rest of the amount due towards the company. When the complainant -Rohit Singhal received the notice, he sent the reply alleging therein that he is not the Director of the said company and he had no concern to the said firm. Thereafter, he also made a public notice in the paper Hindustan Times informing to all that he is not concerned to the said firm. The complainant -Rohit Singhal was never concerned with the firm. After receiving the notice, he inquired about the said firm and he came to know that the said firm has been closed on 15.10.1998. it was revealed that on 28.10.1998, after the closure of the firm, the complainant had been shown as a Director from the date of 10.04.1998 at the behest of Manoj Rastogi. When the complainant inquired from Manoj Rastogi he refused to made such proposal to the Registrar of Company at Kanpur and he had stated that the signature on such proposal seems to be forged one. Shri Manoj Rastogi also informed him that he had already informed the Registrar of the Company on 26.10.1998 and 03.11.1998 that there was no change in the Director of the company. Thereafter, the complainant -Rohit Singhal approached the present applicants and they stated that what they had to do, they had done it and also asked them to do whatever they like. The F.I.R. was lodged indicating the above facts. The investigation was conducted as usual and it culminated into the final report. Thereafter a protest petition was filed before the learned Magistrate and the learned Magistrate registered the said complaint and recorded the statement u/s 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate recorded the statement of the complainant -Rohit Singhal and statement of Ashok Singhal were also recorded. Thereafter, the cognizance order was passed against the present applicants u/s 420, 468, 471 I.P.C.

(3.) FEELING aggrieved by the said cognizance order, the present petition has been filed.