IBUNGATA SINGH Vs. PRAKASH CHAND JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this revision petition the petitioners have sought for a direction for quashing of the Criminal Proceedings in Complaint Case No. 1528 C/92 pending before the learned C.J.M. Kamrup.

(2.) The respondent, on 16.9.92 filed a complaint case being Complaint Case No. 1528 C/92 before the learned C.J.M., Kamrup against the petitioners alleging inter-alia that the accused petitioner No. 1 being one of the partners of petitioner No. 2 carrying on business of tailoring, approached the respondent at Guwahati to allow him to purchase different kinds of cloth amounting to Rs.3,665.00 with a promise that the payment of the same would be made within 45 days from the delivery of the goods. The respondent in good faith delivered the goods to the accused petitioner No. 1 and on subsequent dates also on such promise the respondent delivered further goods to the accused- petitioner No. 1. Ultimately on the basis of the promise of the plaintiff No. 1 the respondent was entitled to an amount of Rs.16,127.05 out of which only Rs.6,300.00 was paid. Since the petitioners failed to make the payment as per promise for which the respondent/petitioners had to part with the goods, it was alleged that the petitioners committed an offence u/s 420/406 IPC.

(3.) Mr Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the petitioners strenuously argues that taking face value of the complaint itself no offence under Sections 420/406 IPC has been made out against the petitioners and as such, on that score alone this complaint proceeding is liable to be quashed. He has also drawn attention of this Court to the statements made by the respondent in his evidence which is annexed as Annexure-D to the revision petition and contends that in cross-examination itself the respondent had categorically stated that he received Rs.6,300/- against four bills during the period from 14.9.87 to 16.9.92 and in that process the respondent admittedly received more than Rs. 18,000/- from the accused-petitioners during the period from 14.9.87 to 16.9.92 including the payment of earlier bills which goes to show that the respondent received the excess amount so claimed by him in the complaint petition.