S SHYAMSUNDER Vs. N NATARAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, in Crl. M.P.No. 47 of 1983, allowing the revision and setting aside the order of dismissal of the complaint passed by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Coimbatore under Section 203, Criminal Procedure Code. Crl. M.P.No.6273 of 1983 is a petition filed by the revision petitioners to quash the proceedings in C.C.No. 618 of 1983 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Coimbatore.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case which are necessary for the disposal of the revision may be narrated as follows: A private complaint preferred by the respondent against the petitioners-accused 1 to 4 for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B and 420, Indian Penal Code was taken cognizance by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Coimbatore. THE allegations in the complaint are that the second petitioner is the Managing Director of Textool Company, that petitioners 1, 3 and 4 are his son, son-in-law and wife respectively, that the complainant was employed as his Assistant to attend all his work on monthly salary of Rs.500/- that the respondent-complainant sold his car on 17.12.79 and was having the money and that petitioners 2 to 4 advised him to deposit the said amount in the Karur Vysya Bank, Siddiamber Ex Bazaar Street, Hyderabad, where the third petitioner was the Agent, in order to reach the target for the third accused in mobilising deposits from the customers. Accordingly, the respondent took a draft for Rs.25,000/- on 24.12.1979 from Karur Vysya Bank, Coimbatore, in the name of the first petitioner on the fraudulent representation that his son would be getting an employment in the said Bank, of the amount is deposited. When respondent went to the residence of the third petitioner at Secunderabad on 27.12.1979, his signatures were taken in stamp papers by the third petitioner at the instance of the first petitioner and he was informed that the amount was deposited in the joint account fixed deposit for 5 years from 27.12.1979. Later, the first petitioner had drawn a sum of Rs.8,000/- in the first week of October, 1980, without the consent and knowledge of the respondent and when he questioned the petitioners at their residence, he was informed that it was only an adjustment to purchase coconut thope at Attimadai Village by one Palaniswamy Gounder and he could get back the entire amount with interest after 5 years.

(3.) THE learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Coimbatore, examined the respondent on oath and took cognizance of the complaint, but he postponed the issue of process against the petitioners and ordered enquiry under Section 202, Criminal Procedure Code, and directed the complainant-respondent to produce witnesses. Two witnesses were produced on 2.4.1983 and they were examined. THE case was adjourned to 5.4.1983 and on that day, the learned Magistrate dismissed the complaint under Section 203, Criminal Procedure Code for the reasons assigned in his judgment.