KIRTI R TRIVEDI Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant has preferred the present revision against the order dated 3.11.2009 passed by the learned Second Additional Judge to 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara in S.T.No.231/2009, whereby the charges of offence punishable under sections 419, 420, 467 and 468 of IPC were framed against the applicant.

(2.) The prosecution's case, in short, is that, the complainant Sumit Kumar Kabra has sent a complaint to the S.P., Chhindwara on 17.5.2006 that the applicant and the complainant entered into a partnership agreement dated 14.1.1996 and it was agreed that from 1997, the income obtained from Anupam Drilling Company shall be divided between the applicant and the complainant. An account of firm was also opened in Allahabad Bank, Chhindwara in the year 1996. Wife of the complainant suffered illness and therefore, the complainant could not see the transactions of the company. In the year 1998, his wife died. Thereafter, the complainant found that no transaction took place in the partnership firm and therefore, no income was shown in the account of the firm kept in Allahabad Bank but, in January, 2006, the complainant was informed that the applicant was continuing his business in the name of Anupam Drilling Company and he converted that partnership firm into a proprietary concern and he is getting the profit in his personal accounts and he was dealing the work of Anupam Drilling Company in his own name. The complaint was referred to the concerned Police Station and SDOP was also directed for enquiry. Thereafter, a case was registered. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties framed the aforesaid charges thereafter.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The complainant Sumit Kumar Kabra was also made a party in the present revision and he is duly represented by Shri P.C.Paliwal, Advocate.