MAYTAS-GAYATRI JV Vs. STATE OF NAGALAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. K. Luikang Michael, learned counsel for the petitioners and also heard Mr. M. Kasar, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 and Ms. S. Mere, learned P.P. for the respondent No.1.

(2.) The present petition has been filed under Sec. 482 Cr. P.C by the four petitioners praying for quashing of the order dtd. 21/5/2019 issued by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Longleng, Nagaland in C.R Case No. 01/2018 against the petitioners and also for quashing of the summons issued consequentially. The petitioners have also prayed for quashing of Criminal Case No. 01/2018 registered u/s 406/417/420 IPC against the petitioners pending before the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Longleng, Nagaland.

(3.) The case as projected in the pleadings is that the petitioner No.1 claims to be a joint venture incorporated under the Companies Act, having its Office at Door No.8/2/120/113/3,4th Floor, Sanali Info Park, Cyber Towers, Road No.2, Banjara Hills, Hyder-abad-500033. The petitioner No.1 had entered into a contract with the Chief Engineer, PWD, (N.H), Nagaland on 3/2/2011 for executing the work of 2 Laning of Longleng-Changtongya Road, Mon-TamluMerangkong Road, Phek-Pfutsero Road and Zunheboto-Chakabama Road in the State of Nagaland under Phase 'A' of SARDP-NE. Records show that PIL No. 7/2013 was filed in the Gauhati High Court in an effort to expedite the laying of the 329 Km road relating to the work for which the petitioner No.1 had entered into a contract with the Government of India vide agreement dtd. 3/2/2011 mentioned hereinabove and which work had been stalled. The Hon'ble Apex Court while disposing of the Civil Appeal No. 342343/2017 by its order dtd. 11/1/2017, (which arose out of the order dated 13.10. 2015 passed in PIL No. 7/2013 and the order dtd. 25/7/2016 passed in Review Petition No. 146/2015), allowed the Government of India to foreclose the contract and to re-tender the project, by initiating a fresh process, by following the contemplated procedure. The petitioner No.1 herein, who was arrayed as the respondent No.7 in the Civil Appeal and whose contract was at risk of being foreclosed, was left to pursue his remedies in terms of the arbitration clause incorporated in the agreement dtd. 3/2/2011. On 15/10/2018, the respondent No. 2 in this revision petition had filed a complaint in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Longleng, Nagaland. In the complaint, it was alleged that the petitioner No.1 and its employees had issued two work orders to the complainant on 5/3/2015 and 2/4/2015 respectively for execution of certain works and it was alleged about non payment of bill by the petitioner No.1 herein despite submission of bills. The complainant/respondent No.2 herein prayed before the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Longleng, Nagaland to take cognizance of offences. The order dtd. 16/8/2018 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Longleng in the complaint is reproduced herein below;