Jharkhand High Court
Vinay Patni vs The State Of Jharkhand And Another .... ... on 7 February, 2024
Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
----
Cr.M.P. No. 406 of 2016
----
1.Vinay Patni
2.Vivek Patni
3.Vijay Kumar Jain Patni @ Vijay Patni .... Petitioners
-- Versus --
The State of Jharkhand and Another .... Opposite Parties
----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
---
For the Petitioners :- Mr. Ajay Kumar Sah, Advocate
For the State :- Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Advocate
For the O.P.No.2 :- Mr. Amit Sinha, Advocate
----
6/07.02.2024 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned
counsel for the respondent State as well as learned counsel for the
O.P.No.2.
2. This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire
criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dated
14.08.2015 in connection with Complaint Case No.507 of 2015, T.R.
No.1411 of 2015, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate,
Giridih.
3. The complaint case has been filed alleging therein that
complainant is manufacturer of carbon electro paste. In January, 2010,
the accused persons came to the head office of the complainant, at
Barganda and represented that they were Directors of M/s Hira Concast
Limited and they wanted to purchase carbon electro paste from the
complainant. After deliberations, when complainant asked for advance
for supply of carbon electro paste accused persons represented that
there was no provision for making payment of amount in advance and
the payment against materials supplied shall be paid within sixty days
from the date of supply. They assured that complainant should not worry
about payment and if not made entire materials supplied shall be
returned to the complainant. Upon said assurance, accused persons on
23.1.2010 got supply of materials worth Rs.6,49,966/- and paid entire
amount. Thereafter again in July 2014 the accused persons got materials
worth Rs.23,94,953/- supplied to their company but did not pay the price
thereof. It is alleged that a sum of Rs.23,94,953/- is due against supply
of materials by complainant and accused persons have neither made
payment of aforesaid amount nor they returned the goods supplied by
complainant and on request to pay outstanding amount the accused
persons have clearly denied their liabilities.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that learned
court has taken cognizance under sections 406 and 420 of the IPC. He
submits that the allegations are made that payment of carbon electro
paste to the tune of Rs.23,94,953/- was not paid which was outstanding.
He further submits that however it is an admitted position that there
were business transactions between the petitioners and the O.P.No.2 and
in the complaint itself it has been admitted that a sum of Rs.6,50,000/-
was paid. He further submits that in solemn affirmation on the query of
the court it has been disclosed by the O.P.No.2 that such transaction has
taken place four to five times. He submits that in view of that no case of
cheating is made out.
5. Learned counsel for the O.P.No.2 submits that confidence
was gained over by way of making the part payment and thereafter
further supply was made and in view of that the case is made out. He
relied in the case of Pankaj Lohariwal v. State of Jharkhand and
Another [W.P.(Cr.) No.300 of 2015] which was disposed of on
04.11.2015. He further submits that on the allegation made by the
O.P.No.2 the case of the petitioner is fully covered in view of the
judgment of this Court as aforesaid and the said judgment is affirmed by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal No.53 of 2016 and
the said SLP was dismissed by order dated 15.01.2016.
6. In the complaint there is allegation in paragraph no.2 for
supply of carbon electro paste and the assurance was also given that if
the payment is not made articles in question will be refunded and further
it is stated that the petitioners have visited in the office of the
complainant and had requested for supply of carbon electro paste.
Identical is situation in W.P.(Cr.) No.300 of 2015 and that matter was also
arisen out of supply of carbon electro paste and the same was dismissed
by the coordinate Bench on 04.11.2015 in W.P.(Cr.) No.300 of 2015 which
was affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid S.L.P. The
case of the petitioners is covered in view of the judgment relied by the
learned counsel for the O.P.No.2. Hence, no case of interference is made
out.
7. Accordingly, Cr.M.P. No.406 of 2016 is dismissed.
8. Pending petition if any also stands disposed of accordingly.
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
SI/,
