TOTALFINAELF INDIALIMITED Vs. SHYAM BABU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall govern the disposal of this petition as well as Misc. Criminal Case No. 2248/2006 (Raja Upadhyaya Vs. Shyam Babu ). As both the petitions arise out of the same order and common question is involved in both the petitions, they are being disposed of analogously.

(2.) INVOKING extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (henceforth, 'the Code'), petitioners of both the petitions have filed these petitions for quashing the proceedings in complaint Case No. 1375/2005 pending against them in the Court of CJM, chhatarpur and for setting aside the order dated 15-12-2005 passed in the said proceedings.

(3.) THE facts which led to filing of these petitions, in nut shell, are that the respondent in both the petitions filed a complaint against the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 of the instant petition and one Raja Upadhyaya, the petitioner in Misc. Cr. Case No. 2248/2006. It is alleged in the complaint that Thierry Gautier and sanjay Handa, the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3, respectively, of the instant petition are, respectively, the Chief Executive Officer and Assistant Vice President, central Zone M/s. Totalfinaelf India Limited (the petitioner No. 1 in the present petition ). It is alleged in the complaint that the complainant is running business of auto parts at Chhatarpur. Petitioner No. 1 was indulged in manufacturing of lubricants and other oil products. In order to promote sale of lubricants oil the respondent was appointed as one of the distributors on 26-4-1997. On 30-4-97 the complainant sent a draft of Rs. 35,000/- to Jabalpur depot of the accused persons. Thereafter, the respondent had been sending drafts in favour of the petitioner-company to supply the goods. The accused persons did not account for the following drafts:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_340_MPHT3_2007Html1.htm</FRM> Despite receiving the aforesaid drafts the accused persons did not dispatch the goods and closed their business in the year 2000. When the complainant asked for the copy of his account the accused persons delivered the copy in the year 2002. On comparison the complainant found that the aforesaid eight drafts have not been shown in his account. The complainant contacted the accused persons for settling the account but the accused persons did not settled the account. It is alleged in the complaint that the accused persons caused wrongful loss of Rs. 3,23,000/ -.