ANIL ANAND Vs. CHENAB TEXTILE MILLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the medium of this petition, petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court in terms of Section 561-A, Code of Criminal Procedure (for short Cr.P.C) for quashing the cognizance drawn, process issued and proceedings conducted in complaint titled M/s. Chenab Textile Mills, Kathua v. Sh. Prashant Dingra & Anr., on the grounds taken in the memo of petition.

(2.) Notice came to be issued but despite service respondents no. 1 is not present. Accordingly, respondent no.1 is set ex p e .

(3.) It is alleged that the payment was not made to the petitioner by the accused on some grounds. It is no where averred in the complaint that the accused have committed the offences punishable under Sections 420/120-B/34 Ranbir Penal Code (for short R.P.C) right from the beginning. All the ingredients of the offence which constitute the commission of offences under Section 420 R.P.C. must co-exist and mere breach of contract is not enough. As per the averments contained in the complaint, the payment was stopped. Thus, it cannot be said that the accused were having criminal intentions right from the beginning, even it cannot be presumed. There is nothing on the file suggesting the fact that the accused have committed the offences punishable under Sections 420/120-B/34 R.P.C.