JAIN IRRIGATION SYSTEM LTD Vs. MILIND ANAND MOBHARKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition under Section 482 of the code of Criminal Procedure read with Article 227 of the Constitution of india is directed against the order of the Judicial Magistrate, Nevasa issuing process under Sections 417 and 420 read with 34 of the Penal Code in a private complaint, registered as Criminal Case No. 15 of 1989 in which one Milind Mobharkar is the complainant and 10 persons including jain Irrigation Systems Ltd, Nimkhedi Khurd, district Jalgaon are accused.

(2.) THE material facts with which we are concerned for the disposal of this writ petition may briefly be stated as under:-The complainant with his wife and father who from Hindu Joint family have got agricultural lands at Gopalpur in Newasa tahsil in Ahmednagar District. Being irrigated land, the complainant used to raise sugarcane crop in that land He is running a Pathology Laboratory at Newasa Khurd. It is alleged by the complainant that accused No. 9 first approached him and impressed upon him that if he would irrigate his agricultural land to raise sugarcane crop under the irrigation system of accused No. 1 company, he would get more profit than what he was then getting. The complainant then received, so it is said and alleged, some pamphlets and letters signed by the other directors of the Company, impressing upon him the attractive prospects of irrigation system of accused No. 1 company. It is the case and claim of the complainant that so induced he was that he was quite persuaded to take the bi-wall system material of accused No. 1 company and help of the accused and spent rs. 40,000 as expenses but soon he found that it was useless expenditure. Hence, this complaint under Sections 417 and 420 read with 34 of the Penal Code on the allegation that all the accused in furtherance of their common intention cheated the complainant.

(3.) THE learned Judicial Magistrate, Newasa on recording the statement of the complainant under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, issued the process against the accused and aggrieved by issuance of process, the accused came to this Court through this writ petition challenging that order.