DEEPAK KHUNTIA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of a proceeding in complaint case No. 320C of 2018 pending before the Learned Judicial Magistrate 3rd Court Howrah (sadar) u/s 406/34 IPC.

(2.) The brief fact of the case is that the present opposite party No. 2 has lodged a complaint case against the present petitioners contending inter alia that the complainant is a proprietor of a company namely Sur Feed Centre and the present petitioner/accused persons are the proprietor of a company namely Eva Exotica Private Limited. There were business transactions between the two companies for more than 2 years. There was an agreement between the parties that the complainant company shall provide the raw materials to the accused company and by such raw materials the accused company shall manufacture animal feed including poultry and cattle feeds and shall supply the same to the complainant company. For such purpose the accused company shall receive the manufacturing and processing feeds from the complainant company. It has been alleged that as per such agreement a huge raw material were supplied by the complainant company to the accused company which was stocked and stored at the factory of the accused company. According to the terms, the accused company used to deliver the animal feed to the complainant company and bills are raised by the accused company and were paid by the complainant company regularly. It is the allegation of the complaint that suddenly on 8/5/2018 the accused persons had stopped production of poultry feed though a huge raw materials were lying in the custody of the accused persons valued more than Rs.2.5 crores.

(3.) The further allegation of the complainant was that he has informed by his labour that the accused company is selling raw materials to the third parties. On query the accused company with ulterior motive demanded Rs.2.25 Crores from the complainant by saying that if the same amount is not paid the raw materials shall not be released. On several occasions the complainant requested the accused persons to supply animal feed but they denied to do so and finally, threaten the complaint and his officials and that if they come again to their unit factory they will not hesitate to assault the complainant. Hence this complaint. After receiving such complaint the cognizance was taken by the Learned Magistrate u/s 406/34 IPC and the Learned Magistrate after examine the complainant on oath u/s 200 Cr.P.C. and one witness issued process against the present petitioner u/s 406 and 34 IPC and also issued search warrant of scheduled articles and called for a report from the Officer-in-Charge concern by the 28/5/2018. By such order of Learned Magistrate directed the OC concern not to hand over the articles to anybody except by the court's order. The complainant is directed to furnish proper identification marks on his raw materials during the process of search. Being aggrieved and satisfied with the said order of issuance of process and the issuance of search warrant the present revision has been preferred for quashing the entire criminal proceeding. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the Learned Magistrate has committed a grave error of issuance of process by virtue of the petition of complaint. The petition of complaint dose not disclose any offence punishable u/s 406/34 IPC.