VIJAY CHOUDHARY AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been faded under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C praying that the FIR No. 183/2009, registered at police station Manak Chowk, Jaipur City (North) for the offence under Sec. 420 and 406 Penal Code be quashed. The petitioners in the present case are running a shop in the name and style of M/s. Jewel International. The complainant respondent is also a jeweler. The petitioner firm purchased some jewellery articles form the complainant firm namely M/s. Vinayak Jewellery, Jaipur. It is not disputed that for the purchase of jewellery articles the petitioners had issued four cheques which on presentation had bounced and the complainant has instituted complaints for prosecution of the petitioners for offences under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complainant also lodged a FIR with the police stating therein that the jewellery articles were given on trust to the firm of the accused petitioner through younger brother of the petitioner for approval by the elder brother accused petitioner No. 1.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, in the litigation under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant has made out a case of sale of jewellery articles. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that non-payment of the good purchased, as part of the ongoing business transactions will not constitute criminal liability and the petitioner cannot be tried for offence of criminal breach of trust and misappropriation. Reference has been made to para 4 of the petition to state that it was not a case of a single transaction.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on 2005 SCC (Cri.) 1515 that non-payment on goods purchased will not constitute criminal liability.