Patna High Court - Orders
Alok Singh & Anr vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 31 July, 2009
Author: Abhijit Sinha
Bench: Abhijit Sinha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.42888 of 2006
1. ALOK SINGH , SON OF AMAR NATH SINGH, ADDITIONAL
DIRECTOR, TRAVEL RESOURCES, EAST INDIA PVT. LTD.,
62H, MAHARAJA TAGORE ROAD, DHAKURIA, POLICE
STATION-YADAVPUR, KOLKATA.
2. SMT. ADETE LAHERE, WIFE OF ALOK SINGH, 62H,
MAHARAJA TAGORE ROAD, DHAKURIA, POLICE
STATION YADAVPUR, KOLKATA.
...............................................................PETITIONERS.
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR.
2. RANJAN KUMAR, SON OF PROF. BRIJ KISHORE MISHRA, A
RESIDENT OF MUHAMMADPUR, POLICE STATION
SULTANGANJ, DISTRICT-PATNA.
.........................................................OPPOSITE PARTIES.
-----------
For the Petitioners : Dr. Ravindra Kumar, Advocate.
For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A.P.P.
For O.P.No.2 : None.
----------
O R D E R
The two petitioners, who have been arrayed as accused in Complaint Case No.CA-843 of 2004 giving rise to Sultangunj P.S. Case No.275 of 2005, have prayed for the quashing of the entire prosecution arising out of the said police case.
One Ranjan Kumar, the complainant/informant, impleaded herein as O.P. No.2, filed the aforesaid complaint, inter alia, stating that he is a business man having his own office at Patna, Bangalore and New Delhi and in course of his business he came into contact with the two petitioners and a business relationship developed between them. It is said that the petitioner, Alok Singh, has his own business -2- in Kolkata and some time in the month of March, 2004 he alongwith accused no.2 , Adete Lahere came to the Mohammadpur, Patna, residence of the informant and explained to him about the proposed project in Port Blair and asked the informant to join as Director and purchase shares of their company, M/s. Travel Resources, East India Private Limited, Kolkata(hereinafter referred to as "the Kolkata Company") in the presence of Amrendra Prasad and Devendra Kumar. It is alleged that Alok Singh repeatedly held telephonic discussions with the informant and on 17.6.2004 the informant sent a letter to the Chairperson of the Kolkata Company Adete Lahere with a request to visit his office at Bangalore. On 25.6.2004 a meeting was held at Bangalore between the informant and Alok Singh in the presence of C.S. Shreenivas and Mamta G. where the terms and conditions were discussed which included that the informant would be the Director for one year from Ist July, 2004 with a salary of Rs.50,000/- per month and would also be entitled to travelling allowances and bonus of 10% of the turn over of the total business generated only through Port Blair Project and 60% of the shares of the Kolkata Company was offered to the informant for purchase and it was stated that the appointment letter would be sent after incorporation of his name at R.O.C. A final decision was deferred at the instance of the informant as he wanted his Chartered Accountant, C.S. Shreeniwas , to go through the papers of the Kolkata Company and send his advise to the informant for further action. It was also decided that the informant would look into the matter with Indian Airlines and Air India at Delhi, Bombay or any -3- other place as required for the same and will move to Delhi at the earliest and Alok Singh would look after the finance and marketing part at Durgapur, Kolkata, Bokaro and other places. It was further suggested by Alok Singh that after preliminary survey in their respective fields the informant and Alok Singh would visit Port Blair to evaluate the ground realities and would seek support from the Andaman administration. On 26.6.2004, the informant sent a letter to Adete Lahere accepting the terms for joining the post of Director and requested for sending the appointment letter. On 28.6.2004, the informant wrote a letter to Adete Lahere informing her of his visit to Port Blair on 30.6.2004 and requested to keep his appointment letter ready alongwith the final reports pertaining to the Kolkata Company. It is said that the informant and Alok Singh visited Port Blair and held an emergency meeting with the Joint Director and Director, Tourism, Directorate of Information Publicity and Tourism, Andaman and Niccobar Administration, Port Blair as also the Chief Secretary, Andaman and Niccobar Administration respectively on 2.7.2004 and 5.7.2004.
It is further stated that Alok Singh gave information to the informant regarding filling up of Form-32 before the Assistant Registrar of Kolkata Company and sent a copy thereof to the informant for filling up the same whereupon the informant asked Alok Singh to send him a copy of the forwarding letter submitted to R.O.C. alongwith Form-32 including his name as Director and a copy of Form-32 submitted to R.O.C. and the receipts of money deposited as -4- fee for the purposes of maintaining record for himself. On 15.7.2004, the informant wrote a letter to the accused stating that he alongwith C.S. Shreenivas would visit the Kolkata Office to study the papers of the Kolkata Company and after his advice the informant would be able to decide about buying shares of the Kolkata Company. A request was also made to send his T.A. bills for reimbursement and arrange for its payment. Thereafter the informant wrote a letter to C.S. Shreenivas for chartering of an Aircraft for Kolkata Project intimating him of the offer made by Alok Singh to make him the Director. On the advice of C.S. Shreenivas, the informant, on perusal of the report submitted by him after examining the Kolkata Company's papers, conveyed his decision on 5.8.2004 of not buying shares of the Kolkata Company. It is alleged that Alok Singh issued two cheques in favour of the informant on 12.8.2004 each for Rs.50,000/- drawn on the Centurion Bank by way of payment of salary for the month of July and T.A. bills. The complainant deposited the said cheques in his own account for encashment. However, they were not encashed and on 13.8.2004 in the memorandum of reasons it was stated that the cheques had not been encashed due to insufficient funds. The informant has complained regarding making attempts to contact the accused several times who avoided talking to him. A legal notice was sent to the accused on 5.9.2004 which was returned with the report that the addressee had not been met. In the aforesaid circumstances, the informant presumed that the accused had committed offences under Sections 406, 420, 468 and -5- 120-B I.P.C. as also Section 138 N.I. Act.
The submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that it would be apparent from perusal of the materials available on record that the present case had been filed by suppressing material facts by the informant with the sole intention of putting the petitioner and his wife in peril. It was submitted that the informant had filed forged and fabricated letters using the tricks of scanning and computer as the informant was carrying on business of printing and selling books at Bangalore. It is also submitted that although the petitioners have no house in Patna, a fabricated address had been given to bring the case within the ambit of Patna Court. In this connection, it was submitted that in the year 2003 the informant contacted petitioner no.1 and with ulterior motive selected him as franchisee for West Bengal for 1.5.2003 to 30.10.2003 and subsequent thereto the informant took loan of Rs.4,00,000/- from petitioner no.1 and impressed the petitioners by paying back the entire amount by depositing the same in the account of the petitioner no.1 at Bangalore. Thereafter the informant is said to have visited the office as also the residence of the petitioner at Kolkata on several occasions with the object of starting a joint business with the petitioner under the name and style of M/s. LTC Package and accordingly the complainant insisted upon the petitioners to purchase land and make arrangements for hotel accommodation in Government/Private Hotels, furnished flats as also arrangement for meals and hiring vehicles. It was also decided that the business would commence from the month of -6- October, 2004. It is also said that the informant estimated that a plan of LTC passenger visiting Port Blair during October, 2004 to March, 2005 would approximately be Rs.30,000/- and that each passenger would stay in Port Blair for at least five days on triple sharing basis and for that details were also furnished which eventually as per projection would fetch Rs.2,50,00,000/- out of which 15% would be the profit which would amount to Rs.36,50,000/- and it would be equally shared between the informant and petitioner no.1. The informant also ensured and promised that the said project would be launched at the Travel and Tourism Fair to be held from 19th to 22nd August, 2004 at Netaji Indoor Stadium, Kolkata. A request was also made for investing Rs.15,00,000/- for starting the project and the informant insisted upon the petitioner no.1 to invest 50% of capital of the said project which the petitioner refused because the company of the petitioner was pre-occupied with major projects. Further allurements were given to petitioner no.1 and eventually he in good faith issued 8 post-dated cheques for Rs.7,50,000/- in the name of the informant and his dearest employee Mamta G.. It is also submitted that the informant under false pretext obtained letter heads of the petitioners' Kolkata Company and created fictitious letter on the said letter heads and presented the same before the Indian Airlines Management and on coming to know of the same petitioner no.1 called for an explanation from the informant. Other instances of alleged misdeeds of the informant were agitated including the informant having retained two of the cheques issued by petitioner no.1 -7- for dragging the petitioners to court. It was also submitted that the petitioners had filed Complaint Petition No.4083 of 2004 against the informant alleging commission of offences under Sections 420, 120- B. 380, 468, 469, 471, 504 and 506(II) I.P.C. in which the informant had managed to secure bail. The petitioners had also filed Title Suit No.383 of 2004.
It was finally submitted that since no cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of the Patna Court, the court at Patna had erred in taking cognizance and the prosecution of the petitioner would be an abuse of the process of the court.
In support of the submissions reliance was sought to be placed on the decision of Balwant Singh Vs. State of Bihar, reported in 2007(1) PLJR 697 and it was submitted that the High Court in exercise of its inherent power would certainly intervene to prevent the abuse of the process of the court specially when the proceeding is frivolous and vexatious or malafide or when the proceeding has been instituted for a civil wrong as distinguished from an offence.
On service of summons, the informant-opposite party no.2 filed a vakalatnama to contest the application but at the time of hearing of this application none was present on his behalf.
Admittedly, the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners hinges upon disputed facts which cannot be looked into in a proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C. It is too early in the stage of the proceeding to interfere.
While exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the only -8- requirement is to see whether the continuance of the proceeding would be an abuse of the judicial process and for this the High Court at this stage has no authority or jurisdiction to go into the matter and examine its correctness.
In the facts and the circumstances of the case, I find no merit in this application which is dismissed.
(Abhijit Sinha,J) Patna High Court, Patna.
Dated: The 31st of July, 2009. Pradeep Srivastava/A.F.R.