PRAKASH MANGILAL GHANCHI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application, under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant - original accused no.3 seeks to invoke inherent powers of this Court praying for quashment of the FIR registered with Salabatpura Police Station, Surat being I-C.R.No.19 of 2015 for the offences punishable under Ss. 406 , 409 , 420 , 120(B) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Facts and circumstances giving rise to file present application are that the accused nos.1 and 2 was engaged in the business of grey fabric/cloth and doing their business in the name and style "Vardan Fashion" at Surat. The respondent no.2-complainant was also in the same business, doing the business in the name and style "Jay Ambe Textile". Accused nos.1 and 2 approached the complainant through broker and common friends, for supply of fabric and cloths, etc. Based on the assurance of the middleman and reputation projected by the broker, respondent no.2 was agreed to supply goods on credit basis. It is alleged that in the year 2014, respondent no.2 had supplied goods worth Rs.2,98,916.00 for which the accused nos.1 and 2 failed to pay the amount of business transaction. Respondent on.2 lodged an FIR against accused nos.1 and 2 and present applicant herein for the offences as referred above alleging that the applicants have committed the offence of cheating and criminal breach of trust and thereby, dishonestly induces him to deliver the goods and they have also cheated so many persons of the market. So far applicant is concerned, it is alleged against him that he was business partner of accused nos.1 and 2 and duped the so many businessman of Surat and at the instance of accused nos.1 and 2, he had issued cheques which were dishonoured.

(3.) Mr.Premal Rachh, learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the applicant has nothing to do with the business transaction done by accused nos.1 and 2. He was neither at all party to the transaction as alleged in the FIR nor purchased any goods from the complainant. In such circumstances, he would urge that a bare reading of the FIR, even if they are accepted as it is, do not prima facie constitute offence as alleged. The dispute raised in the FIR is essentially civil in nature as attempt was made to give the cloak of a criminal offence to the matter which is essentially a purely civil in nature. The applicant herein did not make misrepresentation to the complainant nor ask to supply any goods. Thus, therefore, with a view to recover the business transaction amount, the FIR is being filed to pressurize the accused to settle the account.