A VENKATRAMANI Vs. V ARUNAGIRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is an accused in C.C.No.5452 of 2002 pending on the file of the Court of XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, has come forward to file this criminal original petition praying to call for the said records and quash the same.

(2.) The averments of the petition are that the respondent herein filed a private complaint before the Court of XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate on 6.12.2001, which was referred to under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to the Crime Branch, Chennai, which subsequently got registered in Crime No.972 of 2001 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406, 409 and 500 I.P.C.; that after investigation, the Police referred the complaint as civil in nature and the copy of the notice was served on the respondent on 4.6.2002; that thereafter, the respondent filed a protest petition before the Court of XI Metropolitan Magistrate and on such protest petition, objections were sought for from the Police and on perusal of the materials, the learned Magistrate has taken up the complaint on file and having taken cognizance of the matter, issued process to the petitioner for hearing on 6.9.2002 and again on 4.10.2002; that on 4.10.2002, on the endorsement made by the postal authorities, "ID", the learned Magistrate issued non-bailable warrants and on coming to know of the same, the petitioner surrendered before the Magistrate on 17.10.2002 and on such surrender, the NBW was recalled; that on 12.11.2002, the said case was posted for furnishing copies and since the petitioner could not appear on the said day, the case was posted on 13.11.2002 for compliance of furnishing copies; that thereafter, the case got adjourned to 19.11.2002 for recording the evidence of the respondent.

(3.) It is further submitted that the respondent has filed the complaint against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 409 and 500 I.P.C. alleging that the respondent held several posts in Ram Kaashyap Group of Companies; that his share of profits to the tune of Rs.3 crores as on October 2002 was not paid; that the petitioner/accused did not fulfill his promise by giving 25% share in Ram Kaashyap Group of Companies; that he is a shareholder in Ram Kaashyap Investments Limited and the petitioner diverted the funds from this Company; that he also misappropriated the money of the company; that the expenditures were exaggerated; that shares worth Rs.15 lakhs were allotted to one Venkata Krishna without any payment; that the petitioner has given a wrong picture about him to the prospective employers; that such statements are defamatory in nature and hence the petitioner committed breach of trust as an individual and as a promoter he has misappropriated the money of Ram Kaashyap Investment Limited.