Delhi High Court
Sanjay And Others vs National Capital Territory Of ... on 7 July, 2008
Author: Anil Kumar
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C No.2083/2008
% Date of Decision : 07.07.2008
Sanjay and others ....... Petitioners
Through: Mr.Rakesh Khawana, Advocate for
Mr.Rambir Singh, Advocate for the
petitioners.
Versus
National Capital Territory of Delhi (State)
& Another ......... Respondents
Through : Mr.R.N.Vats, APP for the State.
CORAM :-
* HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
1. Whether reporters of Local papers may NO
be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporter or not? NO
3. Whether the judgment should be reported NO
in the Digest?
ANIL KUMAR, J.
*
The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR 246 of 2002 dated 6th June,
2002 under Sections 420/468/471 of India Penal Code on the basis of
complaint filed by the respondent No.2.
The allegations against the petitioners are that 600 cement bags
were taken by the petitioners by representing that they are running
business of building material in the name and style of Sai Baba
Building Material. It is also alleged that the petitioner No.2
impersonated himself to be the owner of B.K. Traders situated at Saboli
Road, Narela, and issued two cheques for Rs.25,000/- each dated 25th
March, 2002 and 25th June, 2006. The said cheques when presented
by respondent No.2 for encashment were returned with the remarks
"insufficient funds and the signatures different". The cheques issued by
the petitioners do not belong to the petitioner No.1 and were from the
chequebook of Shri Yogesh Kumar. The cheques are not allegedly
signed by Shri Yogesh Kumar. In the circumstances, the allegation is
that the petitioner knowingly and intentionally issued the cheques
knowing that the same will not be honoured on presentation nor the
petitioner could legally sign the cheques belonging to another person
and thus the petitioner No.1 has forged the signatures of Shri Yogesh
Kumar and has committed offence under Section 468/471. Shri
Pradeep, petitioner No.2, is also alleged to be fully aware of the cheating
committed by the petitioner No.1 as he has also impersonated as owner
of M/s.B.K. Traders, in whose name the bags of cements were taken by
the petitioner.
From the perusal of the FIR against the petitioner, it cannot be
inferred prima facie that the complaint does not constitute or disclose
any offence against the petitioner so as to entail interference by this
court. It cannot be inferred that the allegations made in the complaint
do not make out the case against the complainant or does not disclose
essential ingredients of the offence under which the FIR is registered
against them, nor it can be inferred that the allegations made against
the petitioners are patently absurd and inherently improbable. No
fundamental or legal defect has been pointed out by the learned counsel
for the petitioner.
In the circumstances, there are no grounds to quash the FIR
No.246/2002 dated 6th June, 2002 under Section 420/468/471 of
Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Narela Industrial Area,
Delhi.
The petition is, therefore, dismissed.
July 07, 2008 ANIL KUMAR, J.
'Dev'
