MAN MOHAN THAPAR Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. By consent, rule is made returnable forthwith.

(2.) The learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 on the other hand submitted that taking into consideration the facts alleged in the complaint which according to her prima facie reveal that after the commission of the offence by the petitioners under section 408 r/w section 120-B of I.P.C., the police have registered the F.I.R. against the petitioners. She has further submitted that as the complaint also discloses the elements of cheating by the petitioners, and hence, the offence under section 420 of I.P.C. has also been added subsequently to the said F.I.R.

(3.) It is not in dispute that the complaint was registered under sections 120-B and 408 of I.P.C. However, subsequently, on the same day, the offence under section 420 of I.P.C. was added to the said F.I.R. The complaint based on which the F.I.R. came to be registered refers to the allegations that under memorandum of understanding between the complainant Company and the petitioners, the warehouse situated in Malaysia was leased to the complainant Company for storing their materials and in terms of the said memorandum, the petitioners were required to purchase the goods as and when required for the manufacture of their product. In other words, the warehouse was to be utilised by the complainant Company for storing certain raw-materials which could be used by the petitioners for their final product. However, such goods were required to be procured by the petitioner on payment of the price thereof. Pursuant to the grant of lease in respect of the warehouse, the complainant had appointed its employee by name Ramdas Naidu s/o. of Pappu Naidu, resident of Krishna Colony, Coimbatore to have control of the goods in the said warehouse. The said Ramdas was in physical control and custody of goods in the warehouse. He was also responsible for supply of such goods from the said warehouse at Malaysia to the company of the petitioners, but the same was to be done on written instructions given to him by way of delivery challans and said Ramdas was required to submit regular accounts of such goods to the head office of the complainant Company at Aquem Alto, Margaon, Goa. The complainant company used to receive raw-materials from various Companies, used to store the same in the warehouse which was under the control of said Ramdas and whenever there has to be order placed by the petitioner's company, the goods were supplied to the petitioner by following the procedure as stated above. Accordingly, the goods were supplied to the petitioner's company as and when the orders were received and the amount was paid under Challan. Since July, 2007 said Ramdas failed to report to his duties and in spite of several attempts to get in touch with him the same proved to be futile. As the conduct of Ramdas appeared to be of suspicious nature, the complainant company on 10.10.2007 deputed one Mr. P.M. Rajan to inspect the stocks at the warehouse at Malaysia and on taking necessary inspection of the stocks and on necessary enquiry, it was found that said Ramdas had siphoned the materials worth Rs. 2 Crores 32 Lacs from the said warehouse without receiving any instruction from the complainant Company and without any payment being received to the complainant company in respect of the said materials and all these acts were done in connivance with the petitioners. The complainant Company tried to verify the information received by the Rajan by contacting Ramdas as well as the petitioners, however, there was no co-operation from the petitioners. Based on these allegation, the complaint came to be filed on 11.11.2007 at Margaon Police Station and accordingly, the impugned F.I.R. came to be registered.