MADHAB BHATTACHARJEE Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision is preferred by the petitioner for quashing the proceedings being G.R. Case No. 959 of 2010 arising out of Barasat Police Station Case No. 509 of 2010 dated 10th March, 2010 under Sections 420/406/506/120B of the Indian Penal Code pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barasat, North 24 Parganas.

(2.) The back ground of starting the instant criminal proceeding by the opposite party no. 2 is as follows:-

(3.) By referring to the averments made in the petition of complaint treated as FIR, Mr. Sekhar Kumar Basu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there was no dishonest intention on the part of the petitioner to induce the opposite party no.2 to provide the fund to the Non-Government Organisation of which the petitioner was the General Secretary at the relevant point of time. The fund was provided by the opposite party no.2 for the purpose of scheduled work of the Non-Government Organisation. It is evident from the averments made by the opposite party no.2 in paragraphs 6 and 7 of the petition of complaint that there was progress of development work of each scheduled scheme to some extent. According to Mr. Basu, the opposite party no.2 himself has admitted in the petition of complaint that there was some progress of development works of each scheduled scheme, though the development may not be upto to the satisfaction of the opposite party no.2 and as such, there was no dishonest intention on the part of the petitioner to induce the opposite party no.2 to supply the fund to the Non-Government Organisation from the very inception of the transaction, and thus, the transaction cannot fall within the ambit of "cheating" defined in Section 415 of the Indian Penal Code. Mr. Basu contends that the petitioner has submitted utilisation certificates and the audit reports for utilisation of the fund provided by the petitioner as reflected in the petition of complaint treated as FIR. According to Mr. Basu, since the opposite party no.2 has not taken any step to challenge the authenticity or genuineness of the audit reports, the audit reports prepared by the auditors of the Non-Government Organisation will be deemed to be final and accepted by the parties including the opposite party no.2. Mr. Basu has urged this Court to consider that the contents of the petition of complaint treated as FIR do not disclose commission of offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.