CHHAJURAM AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, the proprietor of Peeruka Textiles, Ichal Karanji, P.S. Shivajee Nagar, District Kolhapur, Maharashtra, who along with his brother has been arrayed as accused in Complaint Case No. 2059(C) of 2005 has prayed for the quashing of the entire criminal proceeding arising therefrom including the order dated 26.7.2005 passed therein by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna, whereby he has taken cognizance under Sections 406, 420 and 120B IPC against both the accused.

(2.) The complainant, one Urmila Agrawal, proprietor of Weltex (India) Rajendranagar, Patna, impleaded herein as O.P. No. 2, filed the aforesaid complaint inter alia stating that her firm deals in wholesale supply of clothes and in the year 2003 both the accused came to her office in Rajendranagar, and disclosing their identity requested her to supply clothes to them. It is alleged that both the accused thereafter kept visiting her office and on each occasion tried to explain the nuances and benefits of dealing with them and enticed by their assurances she became ready to supply clothes to them and in accordance there with she directed her Kanpur Branch to supply goods to them which was duly carried out. It is said that an agreement had been reached according to which the accused were required to pay in advance 25% of the value of the goods to be supplied but even when after the bill had been prepared and the advance money had not been paid the complainant expressed her inability to send the goods. However, on pleading and assurances the goods were supplied. It is alleged that in all goods worth Rs. 17,02,197.10 paise were supplied to the accused on 01.03.2003 but neither has any payment therefor been made nor the goods have been returned by the accused. It is also alleged that on 15.7.2005 the complainant along with her husband went to the Delhi office of the accused demanding payment which was refused.

(3.) It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has been falsely implicated in this case in order to grab the money of the petitioner as also to put pressure on the accused persons. It has also been submitted that it would be apparent from the recital in the complaint petition that the entire matter relates to commercial transaction and accounting between the parties and at best would amount to a civil cause of action and with the settled law being that civil dispute cannot be adjudicated in a criminal proceeding, the present prosecution was an abuse of the process of the court.