RAM NIWAS GUPTA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of the proceedings being Case No. C/15926/11 under Sec. 409 of the Indian Penal Code, pending before the Court of the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 14th Court, Calcutta and Order dtd. 29/11/2018 passed by the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 14th Court, Calcutta, thereby framing charge for the commission of offence punishable under Sec. 409 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner in connection of with Case No. C/15926/11 corresponding to T.R. 376/11.

(2.) The petitioner 's case is that the Proprietor of M/s HBRM Jute Traders having its principal place of business at 39/1532, 2nd Floor, Room No.1, S.P. Mukherjee Margh, Shiv Ashram, New Delhi 110006, is engaged in the trade of supply and sale of jute and jute goods in and around the region of Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and other states. The petitioner procures such jute and/or jute goods from various manufacturers, mostly in Eastern India and after sale of such goods, deducts his commission and remits the payments to the manufactures by bank draft. The petitioner has being carrying on business without any blemish on his part for more than 2 decades.

(3.) The petitioner has been procuring Jute and jute goods from the Opposite Party no. 2 for trading. Initially the petitioner used to interact with one Mr. Suresh Kumar Ganeriwala (who used act on behalf of Opposite Party No. 2. However sometime in the year 2009 one Mr. Prakash Choraria took over the management of the Opposite Party No.2 and Mr. Choraria started interacting with the petitioner in place of Mr. Ganeriwala. The nature of delivery of goods and payments remained the same. However, after Mr. Choraria stepped into the picture, the petitioner started receiving various complaints from the buyers of jute and jute goods, which were sent by the Opposite Party No. 2, to the extent that the same were of inferior quality. The petitioner informed the Opposite Party No. 2 and requested him to improve the quality of the goods dispatched from Kolkata. Inspite of repeated requests, the quality of the goods so dispatched remained inferior and on every occasion, whenever the petitioner deliberated with Mr. Choraria, he came up with some excuse or the other and undertook to dispatch goods of better quality in future. However the situation did not improve, and since the petitioner was suffering loss in business, he requested the Opposite Party No. 2 to terminate all transactions in future.