PARVEZ ALAM Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application prayer is made for quashing of a proceeding being GR.Case No. 813 of 2002 under Sections 384/420/403/406/120B of the Indian Penal Code arising out of Kharagpur (Local) P.S.Case No. 127 of 2002 that resulted in submission of charge-sheet by the I.O. of the case under the aforesaid sections of the law. Also is challenged the order dated 16th January, 2003 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Midnapore (Sadar) taking cognizance of offence upon submission of charge-sheet and issuing process upon the present petitioners who are two of the accused persons in the said criminal case.

(2.) One Bimal Kumar Sodhani filed on 11th June, a petition under Section 156(3) of the Cr. P.C. before the learned SDJM, Midnapore (Sadar) (now the Chief Judicial Magistrate ) alleging the following facts.

(3.) Accused No.1 Anil Rao was the Managing Director of Associates Infrastructure (I) Pvt. Ltd. and accused No. 3 was the site-in-charge of the said company. They are not the petitioners herein. Accused No. 2 Parvez Alam and accused No. 4 Dilbagh Singh were the Project Manager and the site-in-charge respectively of Hindustan Construction Company. The accused Nos. 2 and 4 are the petitioners in this application as petitioners Nos.1 and 2 respectively. The firm of the accused Nos. 2 and 4, namely, Hindustan Construction Company Ltd. was authorised to perform road construction work for a distance of 10 K.M. on NH-6 and the said firm of accused Nos.2 and 4 approached the accused No.1, the Managing Director of Associates Infrastructure to do the job within a specified period but as the Associates Infrastructure was not in a position to perform the job they entrusted the complainant to do the job for the said accused Nos.1 and 3. A meeting took place at Hotel 'Kaushik' at Roopnarayanpur on 10th November, 2001 between the complainant and the accused No.1 in presence of the other accused persons and witnesses. As per discussion held in the meeting it was agreed by and between the complainant and the accused persons 1 and 3 that the complainant would do the job of emergency nature and would be paid 90 per cent of the total amount for the aforesaid entire work. The complainant started doing the construction work from 12th November, 2001 for which he had to hire various valuable machines, tools, parameters and other allied articles by incurring expenditure of lots of money. It was settled that the accused No.1 would pay the amount to the complainant part by part preferably every fortnight in each month. After expiry of one month from 12th November, 2001 when the complainant asked the accused No.1 for payment of money he replied that he had not received bill and requested the complainant to proceed with the work which he did. The work was completed. The complainant visited the office of the accused No.1 on several occasions and asked the accused No.1 for payment but at all time he was told that the accused No.1 did not receive the bill for the work. It is the allegations of the complainant that on most of the occasions it has been noticed that the other accused persons sitting in the office of the accused No.1 made conspiracy against the complainant. During performance of the work on several occasions not only the authorised persons but also the accused persons had taken measurement of work and they were satisfied of the job. Complainant came to know that the accused No.1 after making conspiracy with other accused persons including the present two petitioners in order to cheat the complainant withdrew all relevant bills upto date but did not make payment to the complainant and dishonestly mis-appropriated the amount and converted the same to their own use in violation of the trust. It is alleged that the accused persons pursuant to criminal conspiracy since inception of the work deceived the complainant fraudulently and dishonestly by inducing him to perform the construction work and being so induced the complainant performed the work in good faith and honest belief and thereby has been cheated. The accused No.1 asked the complainant to meet him in his office on 10th June, 2002 for the purpose of payment. When the complainant came to the office he found accused No.3 along with some unknown persons and as soon as he enquired of the accused No.1 the other accused persons used filthy languages and obtained by force and threat of injury his signature on some blank papers. Thus, it is alleged that the accused persons committed offences under Sections 420/403/406/384/120B of the Indian Penal Code.