Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Goyal Industries & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr on 28 October, 2024
28.10.2024
SB
CRR 4588 of 2024
Goyal Industries & Ors.
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
Mr. S. Sharma
Mr. M. Mukherjee
Mr. R. Dutt
Md. D. Taslim
Mr. S. Bhattacharya
Mr. R. Khemuka ... For the Petitioners
Mr. Karan Dudhwewala
Mr. Amar Kumar Dudhwewala ...for the O.P. no. 2
Learned counsel for the opposite party seeks to file
affidavit-in-opposition. Let the same be filed within two
weeks after puja vacation and reply, if any, be filed within
one week thereafter.
Let the matter appear four weeks after puja vacation.
Heard learned counsels for both the parties. It is
submitted by Mr. Mukherjee, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioners that the instant criminal proceeding
being complaint case no. CS/76097 of 2023 pending before
the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 13th Court, Calcutta
has arisen purely on a civil dispute, which is palpably clear
from the petition of complaint wherein it has been admitted
that a business transaction took place between the parties
and the petitioner herein supplied coal tar pitch to the
accused no. 1/partnership firm for an amount of Rs.
12,98,130/-. However it is alleged in the petition of
complaint that after delivery of the above mentioned goods
the accused persons initially just to create confidence upon
the complainant made a part payment of Rs. 8,96,012/-
against the above-mentioned invoices amount and
thereafter the complainant demanded the balance amount
from the accused persons but in spite of repeated request
and reminders, the accused persons have failed or neglected
to make aforesaid payment.
Mr. Mukherjee, learned counsel for the petitioners
submits that from the averments made in the complaint it is
clear that there is no allegation of initial deception in the
complaint and he further submits that from the petition of
complaint, it is admitted position that the accused persons
residing in the State of Maharastra but the court below
without complying the mandatory provision laid down in
Section 202 of the Code, had issued process against the
accused persons.
He further submits that the petitioners herein also
preferred a writ application before the Bombay High Court
being criminal revision no. 610 of 2024 and writ court by an
order dated 24th December, 2024 had withdrawn the said
writ application as prayed by petitioners. However the writ
court granted interim relief for a period of four weeks which
expired on 24th October, 2024.
Learned counsel for the opposite party raised strong
objection and contended that the dispute is purely criminal
in nature and furthermore, the accused persons/petitioners
engaged themselves in forum shopping to get favourable
order and that is why they have filed the said writ petition
before the Bombay High Court and now prayed for relief
before this court which is liable to be rejected and the
petitioners are not entitled to get any sort of interim relief
from this court.
In this context, he also relied upon the judgment of
Alka Bapu Gund Vs. Prakash Kanhaiyalal Kankaria and
others reported in (2017) 11 SCC 108 and State of
Maharashtra Vs. Pankaj Jagshi Gangar reported in (2022)
2 SCC 66.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the
case and also considering the submissions made by the
parties and that petitioners have made out an arguable case
which requires considerations, all further proceedings being
complaint case no. CS/76097 of 2023 pending before the
learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 13th Court, Calcutta be
stayed for a period of four weeks or until further order,
whichever is earlier.
Let the matter appear for hearing four weeks after
opening the court after puja vacation, subject to convenience
of the regular Bench.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied
for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all requisite
formalities.
(Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.)
