DHIRENDRA NATH BANERJEE Vs. JAMINI KANTA MITRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule was issued upon the Chief Presidency Magistrate of Calcutta and on the opposite party to show cause why certain proceedings under the Indian Penal Code pending against the petitioner should not be quashed or why such other or further order or orders should not be made as to this Court might seem fit and proper.

(2.) In November 1946, the petitioner was appointed Chief Accountant of the Bengal Textiles Association, Calcutta. On 8th September, 1945, Ordinance No. XXXII of 1945 had been promulgated to incorporate and regulate the Bengal Textiles Association for the purpose of improving procurement and whole-sale distribution of piece goods in the Province of Bengal as it then was. By an order of this Court on the Original Side dated 30th August, 1948, the Association was directed to be wound up, and Sri Bhagawati Prasad Khaitan and Sri Uma Prosad Mookerjee were appointed official liquidators. On 21st May. 1951, the official liquidators presented an application to this Court for an order on the petitioner and several other persons to pay and restore to the Association diverse sums of money and property misappropriated and misapplied and for directions for steps, civil and criminal, against the persons responsible for such misappropriation and misapplication. In December, 1951. The aforesaid liquidators were discharged, and Sri Rameswarlal Nopany was appointed official liquidator. On 8tn September, 1955, Sri Rameswarlal Nopany filed an application to this Court praying that he may have liberty to prosecute the petitioner and several officers of the Bengal Textiles Association for offences of forgery, using as genuine togged documents, fabrication and falsification of books of accounts of the Association and conspiracy to commit those offences. On the same date, S.R. Das Gupta J. made the following order :

(3.) Thereafter the complainant opposite party was ordered and authorised to file complaints on behalf of the Bengal Textiles Association (in liquidation) represented by the official liquidator. In all, four cases were filed in each of which the petitioner was named as an accused with other persons under Sections 120-B, 476, 477-A and 408 of the Indian Penal Code.