SAMEER SURESHCHANDRA TRIPATHI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these applications arise out of two separate judgments of discharge of accused No.1 and 2/respondent Nos. 2 and 3, dtd. 5/5/2018, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Criminal Revision Application No. 90 of 2018 and Criminal Revision Application No. 265 of 2017 and therefore, both these applications are being disposed of by the common judgment. The applicant in both applications is the original complainant and the respondent Nos.2 and 3 in Cri.Apl. No.612 of 2018 are the accused persons.

(2.) Background facts The complainant/applicant is engaged in the hotel business and is the owner of 'Mustard' and 'Bawarchi' hotels. Accused No.1 Sanjay is the proprietor of the hotel Ashok, Nagpur. Accused No.2 is the father of accused No.1. The complainant came into contact with accused No.1 in connection with the management of food and beverages at Hotel Ashok Nagpur. The Hotel Ashok Nagpur, was to be inaugurated very soon. The complainant was looking for the premises for running the business of his catering. He approached accused No.1. Accused No.1 told the complainant that he is looking for a reliable person to provide food and beverages for the banquet hall of the hotel. Accused No.1, represented that three star hotel by name 'The Ashok Nagpur', having an alliance with the Indian Tourism Development Corporation, was to be inaugurated very soon. In connection with this business, an agreement was arrived at between the complainant and accused No.1. It was agreed that at the initial stage accused Nos. 1 and 2 would allow the complainant to provide the services of food and beverages from the premises of the hotel. It was also agreed that the complainant should give 25% of the total sale to the accused and he should retain the balance 75%. The complainant believed them. The complainant agreed to deposit Rs.40,00,000.00 with accused No.1 as a security deposit. The complainant paid the amount of Rs.20,00,000.00 by two cheques i.e. one drawn on his account maintained with Punjab National Bank for Rs.5,00,000.00 in the name of accused No.2 and another drawn on Tirupati Urban Co-operative Bank of Rs.15,00,000.00 in the name of Accused No.1.

(3.) For the purpose of starting the business, the necessary articles namely crockery, utensils, chairs and tables, were required as suggested by accused No.1. They went to China for purchasing the articles. At that time, the complainant paid Rs.23,00,000.00 to accused No.1. The complainant had engaged the staff. He paid salary to the tune of Rs.5,00,000.00 to the staff. The contract between the complainant and accused Nos.1 and 2 was not reduced into writing because accused Nos. 2 on one pretext or the other avoided to reduce the agreement into writing.