CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION v. The State of West Bengal & Anr.

Judgment

1. Petitioners being the accused persons have filed this Criminal Revisional application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking for quashing of the proceeding being G.R. Case No. 1436 of 2016 arising out of Bowbazar Police Station Case No. 413 dated November 28, 2016 under Sections 406/420/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 pending before the Court of the Learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Calcutta.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 22nd November, 2016, the opposite party no. 2 lodged a written complaint with the Officer- in-Charge of Bowbazar Police Station alleging, inter alia, that the petitioners/accused persons had entered into a criminal conspiracy and, pursuant to the said conspiracy, induced the opposite party no. 2 to deliver Rs. 50 Lakhs as loan to deceive and cheat the complainant’s company, namely, Arunoday Holdings Pvt. Ltd. The company disbursed a loan of Rs. 50 Lakhs to the accused persons with an interest of Rs. 9% per annum. The accused persons, thereafter, kept making irregular payments until 30th September,

2016. Thereafter, a sum of Rs. 32, 48,861/- remained due, but the accused persons did not pay the same. 3

3. Upon a stringent reminder, the accused persons issued three cheques to the company amounting to Rs. 30 Lakhs only (Rs. 10,00,000/= each), handed over them and assured that the remaining amount of Rs. 2,48,861/- shall be cleared on 02.11.2016. However, the said cheques were returned unpaid with the endorsement “Account Closed”. It was then discovered that the accused persons had intentionally deceived the complainant company by issuing the cheques while closing their account indicating that they never had the intention to pay the outstanding amount. When one of the staffs of the complainant’s company visited the accused persons to demand the dues, the accused persons told him that they have “digested” the amount advanced as a loan and further stated that if the complainant makes repeated demands for the recovery of the sum, they would cause bodily harm to the company’s staff.

In the said backdrop, an FIR being Bowbazar Police Station Case No. 413 dated November 28, 2016 under Sections 406/420/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was registered for initiation of investigation against the petitioners herein. Hence, this Criminal Revisional application. 4 SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS:

5. Mr. Bhattacharya, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and in no way connected with the alleged offences. Petitioner no. 2 herein is an office bearer of the petitioner no. 1/Company and is involved in the day-to-day affairs. Petitioners became aware of the initiation of instant proceeding when a purported notice under Section 41A of the CrPC dated 03.02.2017 was served upon the petitioners. The petitioners duly complied with the notice by meeting the Investigating Officer on 08.02.2017 and informed him that the cheques in question being nos. 00260, 00261 and 00262 along with several other cheques were found missing from the records of the petitioner no. 1/company during the period of shifting of the Registered Office of the petitioner no. 1 and for that, a General Diary was lodged with the Officer-in-Charge of Hare Street Police Station being G.D. Entry No. 2086 dated September 21, 2016. Therefore, question of issuing cheques in favour of the Company does not arise. As such, the entire allegation is false and frivolous with regard to the allegation of cheating by way of closing of the bank account. 5a. It was further submitted that the petitioner no. 1 has already made a payment of Rs. 30 Lakhs but this fact has been suppressed 5 by the opposite party no. 2 in their complaint. The loan transaction is purely a civil matter and, therefore, criminal proceeding cannot be initiated against the present petitioners in relation to this civil dispute. 5b. In addition to that, the opposite party no. 2 had initiated proceeding against the petitioners under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (as amended thereto) before the Learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Calcutta and the case was registered being C.S. – 124922/2016 vide order dated 26th July, 2024. Ultimately, the accused persons were acquitted from the said case under the provisions of Section 256(1) of the CrPC and the case was disposed of accordingly by the Learned Trial Court. The initiation of present criminal proceeding appears to be merely for the purpose of recovery of the dues despite there being a separate civil remedy for the recovery of any loan dues from the petitioners. The complaint has been lodged after suppressing the fact that the petitioner no. 1/company has already paid a sum of Rs. 30 Lakhs. The said fact has not disclosed in the written complaint. Instead, the complaint incorrectly states that the accused persons made irregular payments until 30th September, 2016. Therefore, such proceeding is required to be quashed to secure the ends of justice. 6 Learned senior counsel placed reliance of the judgments to bolster his aforesaid submission as follows: - i. Alpic Finance Ltd. Vs. P. Sadasivan & Anr.1; ii. Anil Mahajan Vs. Bhor Industries Ltd. & Anr.2 iii. Vir Prakash Sharma Vs. Anil Kumar Agarwal & Anr.3; iv. Hotline Teletubes and Components Ltd. & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Anr.4; v. G. Sagar Suri & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.5; vi. Satishchandra Ratanlal Shah Vs. State of Gujarat & Anr.6; vii. Medmeme, LLC & Ors. Vs. Ihorse BPO Solutions Pvt. Ltd.7; viii. Sanat Karar & Ors. Vs. State of West Bengal & Anr.8; ix. Uma Shankar Gopalika Vs. State of Bihar & Anr.9; x. Vesa Holdings Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. State of Kerala & Ors.10; xi. Lalit Chaturvedi and Others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another11;