C. Kishanlal v. Shantilal Surana Managing Director,M/s. Surana Corporation Ltd,Chennai – 79

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 06.08.2009CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.KARNANCrl.O.P.No.21337 of 2007andM.P.No.1 of 2007C. Kishanlal.. Petitioner.VersusShantilal SuranaManaging Director,M/s. Surana Corporation Ltd,Chennai – 79... Respondent Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C to call for the recordsin C.C.No.2741 of 2007 on the file of the XIV Metropolitan MagistrateCourt, Egmore, Chennai-8 and quash the same holding the same asillegal and devoid of merits and allow the petition.(C.C.No. is amended as per order of thisCourt dated 30.08.2007 made in M.P.No.3of 2007)For Petitioner : Mr. A.Thiyagarajan, Senior Counsel for M/s. F. Kamal BaigFor Respondent : M/s. S.Gowri Shankar O R D E RThis petition has been filed by the petitioner to call for therecords in C.C.No.2741 of 2007 on the file of the XIV MetropolitanMagistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai-8 and quash the same.2.The respondent/complainant has filed C.C.No.2741 of 2007against the petitioner/accused for an alleged offence under Section500 IPC. The ingredients of the complaint is as follows:- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ The complainant/one Mrs.Shantilal Surana is Managing Directorfor M/s. Surana Corporation Ltd., which is a public Limited Company,lending finance to vehicles on hire purchase basis. Subsequently,the Company's name has been changed as M/s. Surana FinanceCorporation Ltd. The company stopped hire purchase/leasing businessand switched over to carry on jewellery business of gold bullion,silver and precious stones, and changed the name of the company asM/s.Surana Corporation Ltd. The same was registered under theCompanies Registration Act. After that, M/s. Rukma Industries Ltdand Surana Jewellery Ltd, expressed their desire for a merger withMs/. Surana Corporation Ltd. Accordingly, they applied before theHonourable High Court, Madras for the scheme of amalgamation. TheHonourable High Court has also ordered the scheme of amalgamation byorder dated 07.07.2004. Thus, the company is carrying on business ofgold bullion, silver jewellery ornaments, gems, stones etc. Thecomplainant's company has a very successful business.3.The complainant submits that the authorised share capitalof M/s. Surana Corporation Ltd, is 21 crores divided into 2,10,00,000equity shares of Rs.10/- each. The company had gained the trust andconfidence of the public from its inception and is doing a fairlygood job. There is proposal to declare dividend in the current yearas the company's merger took place in the end of the year 2004. Theaccused, Mr.C.Kishanlal had known one Mr.Dharmendra Bafna of Madras,who has been engaged in trading activities in gold bullion, silverwith the complainant's company, M/s. Surana Corporation Ltd. Theaccused knowing about the said business activities of Mr.DharmendraBafna has expressed his intention to do trading activity in goldbullion and silver. In the course of trading activities in goldbullion and silver, the accused suffered a loss and he owes money tothe above said Dharmendra Bafna. It is further alleged that toovercome the loss and the demand of amount due to Dharmendra Bafna,the accused gave a false complaint to the Commissioner of Police,Chennai, against Dharmendra Bafna and 8 others including theDirectors of the complainant ie., M/s. Surana Corporation Ltd. Thecomplainant has alleged that the accused had no dealings or anyconnection whatsoever with the complainant nor has any interest inthe company. The complainant submits that the accused had sent acommunication, containing false and libellous allegations againstM/s.Surana Corporation Ltd, to Multi Commodity Exchange of IndiaLimited in which the company is a member. Therein the accused hadalleged cheating with false promises and so a police complaintagainst all the Directors of M/s. Surana Corporation Ltd was lodgedin Chennai. Thus the accused gave a complaint containing totallyfalse allegations, which are per se defamatory. Pursuant to thecomplaint of the accused, the Multi Commodity Exchange of IndiaLimited had called for explanation in its letter dated 21.04.2006from M/s. Surana Corporation Ltd. Similarly the accused had also https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ forwarded a complaint to the Registrar of Companies, Tamil Nadu,Chennai, alleging that the company and its Directors have induced himto invest in the company and he invested a sum of Rs.4,65,00,000/-and agreed to register a charge for that amount in favour of them.The Registrar of Companies, Tamil Nadu had also called forexplanation from M/s. Surara Corporation Ltd, by its letter dated25.05.2006.4.Further, the complainant states that a First InformationReport is registered by the investigating agency and no final reporthas been filed. The complaint is forwarded only with a view toprejudice the authorities and tarnish the image of the complainant.5.The complainant further states that as the allegations wereper se defamatory, and the same had harmed his reputation, theaccused had committed an offence punishable under Section 500 IPC. 6.The complainant had issued a notice on 06.05.2006 to theaccused demanding unconditional apology and to pay a sum ofRs.2,00,00,000/- (Rupees two crores only) within a week from the dateof receipt of notice, failing which the complainant had stated thathe would launch appropriate proceedings to vindicate his honour.The accused had sent a reply dated 16.05.2006 with false allegationswhich are defamatory through his counsel. Hence, the complainant haslodged this complaint before the XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmoreand the same has been taken on file as C.C.No.2741 of 2007 underSection 200 Cr.P.C for an offence punishable under Section 500 IPC,by the learned Magistrate. In support of the complainant's case, hehas mentioned four witnesses and enclosed five documents.7.Challenging the complaint, the petitioner has filed theabove Criminal Original Petition to quash the case of the respondentherein. The respondent has alleged that the petitioner has sent acommunication on 31.03.2006 containing false and libellousallegations against the complainant's company, to the Registrar ofCompanies, Bangalore and that the copies were marked to 12 persons,including the Governor of Karnataka, Industrial Secretary ofKarnataka Government, Karnataka Industrial Development Board,Bangalore. The petitioner has categorically admitted the businessactivities of the respondent. The petitioner submitted that the saidDharmendra Bafna is the son-in-law of the respondent and sub-agent ofthe company. Through him, the petitioner took part in the saidbusiness. The respondent and his son-in-law boasts that they aredoing trading activity in the business. In the said business, thepetitioner has invested a sum of Rs.4.65 crores, through the subagent/son-in-law of the respondent company directors, namely,Mr.G.R.Surana and Vijayraj Surana. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

8.On a tip of, the petitioner closed his account with the subagent of the company on 02.12.2005 and the sub-agent had duly signedin the diary that the petitioner has 4.95 crores (4.65 crores capitaland 30 lakhs profit) account balance and asked the petitioner to meetthe directors of the respondent company on 10.12.2005 to collect themoney, when the petitioner went to Surana Corporation Ltd, therespondent and Directors of Company and their men put the petitionerinside the office and claimed Rs.2 crores from him, being loss to thecompany. The same was clarified by the petitioner. Immediately, allthe respondents jointly threatened him. The petitioner lodged acomplaint with the City Commissioner of Police on 30.12.2005.Subsequently, case was registered in Crime No.60 of 2006 on analleged offence under Sections 406, 409, 420 and 506(ii) r/w. 120(b)IPC. Immediately, the respondent and others moved bail before thisHon'ble Court.9.The petitioner has alleged that this act of the respondentclearly shows they have conspired to commit fraud. The petitionerhas alleged that the respondent has filed this case with ulteriormotive because the petitioner has filed a criminal case with thepolice against the respondent. Further, the petitioner pointed outthat the dispute which arose between the respondent company directorsand himself is only on the basis of business transactions. So, toinvoke Section 500 IPC is not maintainable. Further, the petitionerpointed out that regarding this dispute a civil suit in C.S.No.200 of2006 is pending in this Court. The petitioner further contended thatthe respondent has not pointed out any imputations which lowered downthe reputation of the respondent. In the said representation to thevarious authorities by the petitioner, a disclosure about what hadbeen the dispute and the facts of the case was only said and nodefamatory statements were made against the respondent. Further, thepetitioner has alleged that he has taken legal steps to safeguard hisright and such an act cannot be termed as defamation.10.Considering the contentions of the complainant and thepetitioner and after hearing the arguments of the learned counselsfor the respective parties, and perusal of the documents presented byboth sides, the Court is of the view that the dispute arose on thebasis of the business transactions between the petitioner and therespondent. The petitioner's representation dated 31.03.2006, sentto various government officials and elected representatives of thepeople, has narrated the dispute between the parties. Further, theCriminal and Civil Case between the parties on the same cause ofaction are also pending before the Hon'ble High Court and City CivilCourt. As such the C.C.No.2741 of 2007 on the file of the XIVMetropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai-8 cannot be quashedand it has to be tried before the learned Magistrate. Therefore,this Court directs the learned XIV Metropolitan Magistrate Court,Egmore, Chennai-8, to dispose the case, as expeditiously as possible, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt ofa copy of this order.11.With the above observation, the Criminal Original Petitionis disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition isclosed.Sd/Asst.Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst.RegistrarmraTo1.The XIV Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai-8.2. -Do- Thro' The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai-8.Copy to The Section Officer,Criminal Section, High Court, Madras.2 cc To Mr.S.Gowri Shankar, Advocate, SR.36934Crl.O.P.No.21337 of 2007andM.P.No.1 of 2007nm(co)pmk.19.8.2009