NITIN HIMANSHU SINHA Vs. PANKAJ NARAYAN KARVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr.Rajiv Patil learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners, out of the reliefs prayed, are pressing the Petition only for the relief of quashing and setting aside Crime no.621 of 2007 and investigation effected therein. The petition is considered only for said reliefs as pressed.

(2.) The said Crime No.621/2007 was registered with respondent No.4- Kothrud police station, Pune, on 14.8.2007 at 18:00 hours for offence under section 406 r/w. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, upon the information / complaint lodged by respondent No.1 (proprietor of Shri Balaji Computers) against petitioners -Directors of Kraft Wagon Design Private Limited (Company registered under Companies Act, 1956) and respondent no.5. It was alleged that though 37 computers for use on monthly rent of Rs.1450/- per computer were entrusted to petitioners and respondent No.5, in the month of August,2005, uptill the date of lodging the complaint, they failed and neglected to pay the agreed rent since month of November-2006. Thus an amount of Rs.12,25,020/- is not paid to respondent no.1 i.e. the rent of Rs.4,75,020/- for 37 computers and cost of the computers Rs.7,50,000/-. Petitioners and respondent no.5 neither returned said computers nor paid such amount in spite of demand from time to time made by respondent no.1. Similarly, the Directors of the said Company had also taken 35 computers on the rent of Rs.1400/- per computer from respondent No.2 -Girish Subhash Shinde, resident of Kothrud, Pune. They did not pay the amount of rent since November, 2006 and the cost of the computers and thus, total amount Rs.21,70,313/-. Thus, Petitioners and Respondent No.5 had committed offence of criminal breach of trust.

(3.) Mr.Rajiv Patil learned Counsel for the petitioners urged that complaint lodged by respondent no.1 fails to disclose commission of any offence much less alleged offence of criminal breach of trust. He urged that bare reading of the complaint reveals that the transaction between the parties was essentially of civil nature. By inviting attention to the vouchers at pages-32-A to 32-F, all dated 11.5.2007 he urged that the said five vouchers reveal that five cheques, each amounting to Rs.51,244/- were handed over to Balaji Computers towards part of full and final payment of hire and purchase of 37 Personal Computers, with a rider of presenting the cheque for clearing only upon replacing / repairing 14 personal computers out of 37 Personal Computers provided. He urged that receiving of the said vouchers and cheques by Balaji Computers respondent No.1 clearly denotes that the real transaction between the parties was of civil nature i.e purchase of 37 personal computers under hire-purchase agreement. He further urged that even accepting the case as alleged by the respondent No.1 in the complaint that the computers were given on rent in the month of August,2005, the further recital in the complaint that the rent had allegedly remained to be paid since November-2006 implies the rent for earlier period having been paid and thus the dispute was in relation to the non payment of rent. He urged that the reason for non-payment of rent was evident from the said vouchers, which denotes that out of 37 computers provided, 14 computers required repair/replacement. He thus contended that the complaint fails to make out case of dishonest intent on the part of the petitioners for not paying agreed rent and/or agreed installment of the property of respondent No.1 taken on rent or purchased under hire purchase agreement. He thus contended that the complaint prima facie fails to make out any case of the petitioners having committed offence of criminal breach of trust.