AQUATREAT ENGINEERS CO LTD Vs. MADHUSUDAN CERAMICS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER accused has preferred this Criminal Revision Application under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Cr. P.C.) and challenged the judgment and order passed by learned Sessions Judge, Bharuch on 27 -3 -2001 in Criminal Revision Application No. 67 of 1998 whereby the judgment and order passed on 2 -5 -1998 by learned J.M.F.C., Jambusar in Inquiry Case No. 83 of 1997 dismissing the complaint u/s 203 of the Cr.P.C., has been quashed and set aside.

(2.) THE petitioner accused and the respondent complainant are the Companies registered under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act. Respondent original complainant filed complaint against the petitioner - accused for the offence punishable u/s 406 and 420 of the I.P. Code in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Jambusar. Learned Magistrate after following the procedure, ordered to make inquiry u/s 202 of the Cr. P.C. Learned Magistrate after recording evidence adduced on behalf of the respondent - complainant came to a conclusion that there is no prima facie case against the petitioner accused and the disputes between the parties are of civil nature and therefore dismissed the complaint by order dated 2 -5 -1998 passed in Criminal Case No.189 of 2001 (Inquiry Case No.83 of 1997). Therefore, respondent complainant filed Criminal Revision Application No.67 of 1998 in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Bharuch. The lower revisional court by order dated 27 -3 -2001 allowed the criminal revision application and set aside the order passed by the trial court and directed the trial court to issue process against the petitioner accused. Therefore, the petitioner - accused has preferred this criminal revision application.

(3.) I have heard learned advocate Mr. B.P. Munshi for the petitioner accused and learned advocate Mr. P.K. Jani for the respondent complainant and Mrs. F.D. Patel for respondent - State at length and in great detail.