SALIL BOSE Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Proceeding in Khatra Police Station case no.24/14 dated 05.04.2014 corresponding G.R. No.264/2014 under sections 420/406/506 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code has been assailed on the premise that the said proceeding was initiated on the basis of subsequent information lodged by the defacto -complainant, opposite party no.2 at the police station herein over the self -same incident.

(2.) It appears that on 09.10.2013 an application under section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. was taken out by the opposite party no.2 against one Tipu Sultan and six others alleging that the said persons being the Director and other office bearers of one M/s Golden Life Agro Indian Limited had induced the opposite party no.2 and various persons to invest in their company on false promise that the invested money would be returned to them with handsome profits. It is further alleged that after the investment the company closed down its business and did not make refund at all. In fact, cheques issued with regard to refund were dishonoured. In spite of direction given by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khatra, Bankura, by order dated 09.10.2013 no First Information Report was registered. Under such circumstances, opposite party no.2 lodged another written complaint with the Inspector In -Charge, Khatra Police Station alleging that he deposited a sum of Rs.8,59,600/ - on false promise that the same shall be repaid with handsome interest. Initial instalment of Rs.2,93,750/ - was sought to be repaid to the petitioner vide cheque dated 25.04.2013 drawn on the State Bank of India. The said cheque was returned unpaid by the banker on presentation. It has been further alleged that the petitioner no.1 is the owner of the said company and had cheated a number of persons in similar manner. The petitioner no.2 is a relation of petitioner no.1 and acted in collusion with the latter in the alleged crime. Upon receipt of the said written complaint, impugned First Information Report being Khatra Police Station case No.24/2014 corresponding to GR No.264/2014 dated 05.04.2014 under sections 406/420/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered for investigation.

(3.) Mr . Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the letter of complaint dated 05.04.2014 is a subsequent intimation of the alleged offence in as much as the opposite party no.2 had already lodged an earlier application under section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. which had been sent for investigation to the police vide order dated 09.10.2013. He further submitted that there was no whisper as to the role of the petitioners in the earlier application under section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. The petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case with ulterior motive. There is nothing on record that petitioner no.1 is the owner of the company or that the petitioner no.2 had played any role with regard to the alleged crime. Mr. Chakraborty further submitted that the depositors have approached before the Writ Court in W.P. No.16338 of 2014 and an order was passed therein protecting their interest. He accordingly prayed for quashing of the impugned criminal case. In support of his submissions, he relied on decisions (T.T. Antony v. State of Keral and others, 2001 AIR(SC) 2637) and ( Babubhai v. State of Gujarat and others, 2010 12 SCC 254).