PRODDATURI SHOBHA RANI Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., petitioners/A2 and A5 implore to quash the proceedings against them in CC No. 38 of 2013 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Dharmavaram, Ananthapuram District, which was taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 403, 406, 409 and 420 read with Section 34 of IPC.

(2.) The private complaint filed by the 2nd respondent/complainant, was forwarded by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Dharmavaram to the Police of Dharmavaram Town Police Station and it was registered as case in Crime No. 90/2010 against A1 to A5 and investigated into. The allegations in the complaint are that the complainant is a Silk Saree Merchant at Dharmavaram, doing business under the name and style "Dasari Rama Dasu and Sons". All the accused are family members and they are partners in M/s. P. Neelakantam and Sons Cloth Merchants, Karimnagar. It is alleged that the accused used to purchase silk sarees on credit basis. On 30.5.2007 A1 visited Dharmavaram and purchased silk sarees under Invoice No. 6 for Rs. 1,31,450/- on behalf of the partners and took the sarees promising that the bill amount would be paid within one month and thus induced the complainant for delivery of the goods. However, the accused failed to repay the amount as promised. The complainant personally went to Karimnagar on number of times and requested them for the repayment of the amount, but accused have postponed the payment on one pretext or other. The complainant recently came to know that the accused were trying to winding up their shop and they have transported stock in the shop to a different place. On knowing the said fact, the complainant immediately rushed to Karimnagar and requested the accused for payment of the amount but the accused failed to pay the amount. Thus the accused have, with a dishonest intention and by playing fraud upon the complainant, cheated him. The police after investigation, laid charge-sheet and learned Magistrate had taken cognizance of the same for the offences under Sections 403, 406, 409 and 420 read with Section 34 of IPC against A1 to A5.

(3.) Though, notice was served on respondent No. 2/complainant there is no representation. Heard learned Counsel for petitioners.