T.T. SIDDARTH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are the accused in FIR No. 119/2013, dated 19.6.2013 registered at Police Station Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P., which reads thus: -

(2.) THEY seek quashing of the aforesaid FIR on the ground that even if the complete contents of the FIR are taken as a whole, even then no offence is made out, much less the offence alleged. They further contend that even if the complaint is accepted in its entirety, it does not make out a case under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, which can be investigated by the police. It is further argued that even if it is accepted that false balance sheets and accounts statements had been filed before the Income Tax Authorities, even then no offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code is made out as there has been no wilful misrepresentation, which is the mandate of Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. It is also claimed that this is a dispute between the partners essentially of a civil nature and, therefore, no criminal proceedings can be initiated on the basis of such allegations.

(3.) RESPONDENT No. 3, who is the complainant, has filed his reply, wherein it has been said that the petitioners have not approached this Court with clean hands and are guilty of suppressing material facts. It is also alleged that the veracity and authenticity of the various documents annexed by the petitioners, in this case, are yet to be verified, ascertained and proved, which can only be done during the enquiry, investigation and then at the time of trial of the case and at this stage, the petitioners cannot be permitted to scuttle the prosecution at the threshold. It is claimed that the petitioners, who are brother and sister, have cheated respondent No. 3 by forging as well as manipulating documents and, therefore, have prima facie committed the offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is claimed that in Annexure P -1, which is deed of partnership dated 17.3.2010, the complainant has been shown as the partner to the extent of 20% while in income tax returns, it is petitioner Deepa V., who has been shown as partner in place of respondent No. 3 that too, to the extent of 50%. It is submitted that in the income tax returns for the assessment year 2011 -12, partnership firm, M/s. Sigma Converters had earned profits to the tune of Rs. 99,61,684/ -.