MOHAN KUMAR KHANDELWAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has prayed for quashing of the FIR on the ground that the FIR was instituted falsely and that any offence is not made out from the allegations as made in the FIR.

(2.) THE respondent No. 11 Dinesh Kumar lodged Gardanibagh (Sachiwalaya) P.S. Case No. 162 of 2006. dated 13.2.2006 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471/34 of the IPC against the petitioner and others unknown. Alleging that he being sole proprietor of M/s. A.G. Computer and Multimedia Inc. was involved in the business of Information Technology since 1966 and he under took small/large project of data entry/ word processing from various clients, private organizations, banks and Government organizations. It was further alleged that the petitioner who was the proprietor of M/s. Mohan Enterprises having it 'soffice at Patna met him in Delhi through his acquaintance and impressed upon him that he had acquaintance with various functionaries of Bihar Government and that he could get large amount of works for him (respondent No. 11) for printing of Electoral Rolls for Bihar State as he (petitioner) had personal dealings with Mr. A.K. Basu, Chief Electoral Officer, Bihar. The informant (respondent No. 11) further stated that the Chief Electoral Officer, Bihar noted tenders in November, 1997 for work of computerization and bringing of more than three crores, which was allotted to him and that he (respondent No. 11) has declared him (petitioner) as his business associate since he had developed confidence in him and was situated at Patna and he had also assured him of investing money and project. He further stated that he authorized Mohan Kumar Khandelwal (petitioner) proprietor Mohan Enterprises to deal with the then Chief Electoral Officer with respect to the work of his firm and that the Chief Electoral Officer was releasing payments by way of bank drafts in favour of his firm M/s. A.G. Computer and Multimedia Inc., Delhi, payable at Delhi which were being received by the petitioner as per his direction and was being delivered to him (respondent No. 11) for depositing into his current account at Nainital Branch. The respondent No. 11 further stated in the FIR that his firm executed computerization and printing of electoral rolls in Bihar for more than three crores and out of the total work he received only 33.87 lakhs so he reminded the petitioner to pursue the matter with the then Chief Electoral Officer for releasing the balance payment. The matter was getting delayed, hence, sensing some suspicion he contacted from Mr. A.K. Basu, the Chief Electoral Officer, who informed him that bank drafts/cheques for a sum of rupees one and half crore had already been released by the office of Chief Electoral Officer in favour of his firm M/s. A.G. Computer and Multimedia Inc. and have been duly received by Mr. Mohan Kumar Khandelwal the petitioner. The informant (respondent No. 11) further alleged that he inquired from Mohan Kumar Khandelwal (petitioner) regarding the payment so received by him, on which he informed him that he had received the balance payment and got the amounts deposited in one separate account in State Bank of India, Treasury Branch Secretariat, Patna. Sensing foul play by Mr. Mohan Kumar Khandelwal (petitioner) and Mr. A.K. Basu he (respondent No. 11) sent fax letter dated 20.2.2000 making request for sending the balance payment directly to his firm at Delhi. It was further alleged in the FIR that in the 1st week of March, 2000 some police personnel of Kotwali Police suddenly reached his residence at Delhi alongwith Mohan Kumar Khandelwal (petitioner) and at his (petitioner 's) behest the police arrested his wife, brother -in -law Sanjay and friend Mr. Birendra Singh since he (respondent) was absent then only he could know that Mohan Kumar Khandelwal (petitioner) had lodged a false and fabricated case, being case No. 88 of 2000 against him and his family members and in connivance with Bihar Police a false charge - sheet has been submitted against him and his family members.

(3.) THE informant (respondent No. 11) further alleged that he filed anticipatory bail application at Patna and petitioner while opposing the bail application submitted one sale -deed with his (respondent No. 1 l 's) forged signature alleging purchase of his firm M/s. A.G. Computer and Multimedia Inc. The informant alleged that he had never sold his firm. It was also alleged by the informant (respondent No. 11) that he filed a suit No. 114 of 2000 in the Court of A.D.J., Tishajari Court, against the petitioner, wherein also the petitioner filed forged and fabricated sale -deed alleging purchase of his firm M/s. A.G. Computer and Multimedia Inc. The informant alleged that he took certified copies of both the two sale -deeds containing different contents as filed by the petitioner in two Courts. It was also alleged that he got the signatures on the sale -deeds as filed by the petitioners in the two Courts examined by forensic expert Mr. V.C. Mishra of 40, Kiran Bihar near Karkardooma Court Delhi, who opined that the two signatures on the two documents containing different contents had been forged and transplanted. - The informant also alleged that the contents of the two documents were also different. On these grounds it was alleged by the informant (respondent No. 11) that the petitioner by forging his signature on two sale -deeds virtually cheated him and the office of Chief Electoral Officer to the tune of Rs. 2,68 crores.