RATANLAL SHARMA AND OTHERS Vs. MANGERAM GHANSHYAMDAS REPRESENTED BY VED PRAKASH, COMMISSION AGENTS, MADURAI AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCUSED 1, 3 and 4 in C.C. 57 of 1975 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, have filed this petition requesting this Court to invoke its extra -ordinary powers under Section 482 Cr. P.C., and to quash the charges framed against them in the abovesaid case.

(2.) IN the petition filed by them its(sic) is averred that a private complaint under Section 420, I.P.C., was filed by the first Respondent herein (complainant) against (1) one K. Gupta Flour and Oil Industries, represented by Ramakaran Das Gupta, Akola, and (2) Shri Krishna Sharma Oil Mills, represented by the first Petitioner herein Ratanlal Sharma, Akola, before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, alleging as follows: Both the accused are doing business at Akola, Maharashtra and are having business dealings with the complainant and in that capacity, the said Ramakaran Das Gupta sent a representative, one Madanlal Sharma, to the Complainant, requesting him to purchase 2750 bags of Uganda Cotton seeds and despatch the same by rail against his permits to Akola. Though the permits were not sent, the representative Madanlal insisted upon the purchase and accordingly the first Respondent herein purchased the quantity and stored the same at Theni in Madurai district and at Rajapalayam, Ramanathapuram district. This was in August, 1974. Thereupon, on further orders in September 1974, the complainant purchased 100 bags of the said variety and stored them in his godown at Madurai. The permits were received from the said Ramakaran Das Gupta in October, 1974 by the first, Respondent for about 1250 bags. Meanwhile, the first Petitioner herein (Ratanlal Sharma) placed orders for 15 wagons of the same variety to be despatched and also sent the permits. The goods were despatched to the first Petitioner from Trichy and Salt Cotaurs as wagons from Madurai were not available. When the said goods arrived at Akola, the first Petitioner refused to take delivery of the goods due to the fall in the prices of cotton seeds. Hence, the first Respondent went over to Akola to settle the matters. In spite of repeated demands made by the first Respondent, the first Petitioner refused to take delivery of the goods when consigned. In order to avoid loss and demurrage, Ramakaran Das Gupta was requested by the first Respondent to take delivery of the cotton seeds which were consigned to the first Petitioner, which request Ramakaran Das Gupta refused to comply with, in collusion with the first Petitioner, and imposed a condition on the first Respondent that unless the latter gave a letter in writing that all prior contracts to both of them stood cancelled and the first Respondent would not take any action against the first Petitioner, Ramakaran Das Gupta would not take the goods. As the first Respondent bad no other alternative to agree to the conditions imposed by Ramakaran Das Gupta, the first Respondent, under duress and coercion ,wrote a letter dated 26th October 1974 as per the conditions imposed by Ramakaran Das Gupta. On receiving the letter. Ramakaran Das Gupta purchased the cotton seeds at the prevailing market rate which was considerably lower than the contract prices. Thus, the first Respondent sustained a considerable wrongful loss in the abovesaid transaction. Thereupon, the first Respondent sold the goods to Das Gupta sent on behalf of the first Petitioner treating it as a separate transaction over and above the goods lying at Madurai, purchased on behalf of Das Gupta, and not instead, on the goods purchased on behalf of the said Das Gupta, which were lying in the first Respondent's godown. Thus, he would complain that the first Respondent who was acting on the dishonest and fraudulent representations made by the two persons mentioned in the complaint, had to purchase the Uganda cotton seeds in large quantities at the then prevailing prices and as a result of the unlawful and deliberate refusal of the said accused to take delivery of the same, was put not only to considerable loss monetarily but also had to suffer mental agony as well. Thus the accused had acted in collusion with each other and had deliberately cheated the complainant and committed offences punishable under Section 420 I.P.C. Mr. C. K. Venkatanarasimhan, appearing for the Petitioners, would submit that the Magistrate, after receipt of this complaint, ordered for an enquiry and report under Section 156, Crl. P.C. Respondent No. 2, after registering a case and investigating the same, filed a charge -sheet against five accused mentioned therein, viz., Petitioners 1 to 3 herein (accused 1,3 and 4 in the charge -sheet); Ramakaran Das Gupta (accused -2 in the complaint presented in Court) and one Madanlal Sharma (5th accused in the charge -sheet)... Thereupon, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, on a perusal of the documents discharged accused 2 and 3 mentioned in the charge -sheet, but framed charges against these Petitioners, for an offence under Sections 420 and 384, I.P.C. Hence, this petition for quashing the proceedings.

(3.) THE Petitioners filed a typed set of papers containing copies of letters and correspondence alleged to have passed between them, another set of which was furnished to the Respondents. Though Mr. Seetharaman, learned Counsel appearing for the first Respondent, does not raise any objection to these papers, I am not inclined to act upon them at this stage without legal proof. Moreover, I am not going into the question of the jurisdiction of the Court on the issue as to whether the offence was committed at Akola, Maharashtra State, or at Madurai where the first Petitioner is said to have collected the materials and transported the same. The main question for my consideration, even admitting the entire averments in the complaint to be true, is whether they would constitute any criminal offence.