C J SHAH Vs. BRIJ MOHAN WADHWA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under section 482 of the Cr. P. C. in which the petitioners No. 1 to 7 pray for the quashing of the order of issue of process against them under section 204 of the Cr. P. C. for committing the offence of criminal breach of trust under section 406 of the I. P. C. The order impugned reads as under :-

(2.) THE petitioners Nos. 1,2,3 and 4 are the partners of the firm petitioners Nos. 5,6 and 7, all of which have their office at 64, Sahar Road, Andheri (East), Bombay. The petitioners, it was alleged, approached the complainant one Brij Mohan Wadhwa, some time in July 1987 and represented to him that these three firms petitioners Nos. 5,6 and 7 had been carrying on business as Builders and Contractors, that the partners of the firms were persons experienced in the business and field of building construction, that they had at that point of time several construction projects on their hands- all of them being very profitable ones. The petitioners, it is alleged, further represented to the complainant-respondent No. 1 Wadhwa that if he were to provide them with money in the form of deposits, they would pay interest at 20% p. a. plus 10% incentive on fixed deposit. Accordingly on 18th July, 1987, the respondent No. 1 complainant deposited Rs. 5000/- each in the name of the two firms i. e. , petitioners Nos. 5 and 6. He was furnished with fixed deposit receipts of this date. Thereafter from time to time the complainant-respondent No. 1 deposited total amount of Rs. 60,000/- with the petitioners and fixed deposit receipts were issued to him by the petitioners. Presumably upon demands, made by the respondent, three cheques of Rs. 1500/-, Rs. 250/- and Rs. 500/- were issued in favour of the respondent-complainant on 10-4-1988, 18-6-88 and 15-5-88 respectively. When presented for encashments, these cheques were as alleged in the complaint, dishonoured by the bank and returned to the complainant with the endorsement Referred to Drawer. This was in spite of the fact that the fixed deposit receipts had already matured. The petitioners-accused are also allged to have thereafter made representation to the complainant that for reasons beyond their control, it had not been possible for them to make payments of the matured fixed deposit receipts and they requested the complainant for grant of time to repay the amounts of the respective fixed deposit receipts with interest as agreed.

(3.) THE sum of Rs. 45,000/- was still due and outstanding under these fixed deposit receipts as the respondent-complainant alleged and which it may be observed here only, is an indication that a repayment to the extent of Rs. l5,000/- had thus come to be made to the respondent-complainant, by the petitioners-accused persons. In spite of further assurance under a letter dt. 8. 2. 1989, no payment was forthcoming from the petitioners and, therefore, the present complaint was filed.