ASHOK UDDHAO PATIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule was already issued in the matter. Heard learned Advocates for the parties.

(2.) Non applicant No. 2 filed complaint namely Criminal Case No. 33/2005 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, 9th Court, Nagpur alleging therein that applicants have committed offence punishable under Section 406, 420 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. After recording of the verification, learned Judicial Magistrate First Class ordered investigation by Police as per Section 202 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Police report came to be filed and, thereafter, the learned Judicial Magistrate on 19.07.2005 came to the conclusion that the process should be issued under Section 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and order to that effect was passed. That order was challenged by filing Criminal Revision No. 357/2005. The learned 12th Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur by judgment and order dated 05.02.2007 dismissed the said Criminal Revision No. 357/2006 against which this application has been filed.

(3.) Few facts, necessary for disposal of this application are as under: Non applicant No. 2 had entrusted two cheques bearing Nos. 323011 and 323012 duly signed but blank to applicant No. 1-Dr. Patil with an understanding, which came to be arrived at between non applicant No. 2, applicant No. 1 and applicant No. 2 that after the bills, which are submitted by applicant No. 2, are scrutinized by the Architect by name Gotmare, applicant No. 2 would be able to get the said cheques from applicant No. 1 and being the beneficiary of the said amount, which is finalised by the Architect. According to the complainant, applicant No. 1 without instructions from non applicant No. 2 and in breach of agreement, delivered the cheques to applicant No. 2 and applicant No. 2 filled in one cheque for a sum of Rs. 9,92,000/-and as the said cheque got dishonoured, applicant No. 2 filed complaint against non applicant No. 2 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and non applicant No. 2 had to face trial. It is on this development, non applicant No. 2 filed a complaint as mentioned aforesaid. The thrust of non applicant No. 2 was on the fact that applicant No. 1 in violation of the trust imposed upon him delivered the cheques to applicant No. 2 and as the cheque got dishonoured, non applicant No. 2 had to face the trial. In the course of investigation statement of Architect Mr. Gotmare was recorded and he has communicated that applicant No. 2 was entitled to receive a sum of Rs. 9,63,000/vide bill No. 1 and bill No. 2 respectively and, thereafter, his statement dated 08.06.2005 indicates that the abstract sheets and measurement sheets in support of the said bills were sent to applicant No. 2.