Sushil Kumar Sharma vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 6595 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

  WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 5TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                      Crl.MC.No.4145 OF 2019(G)

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 1334/2017 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
                   MAGISTRATE COURT, PAYYANNUR


PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 &2:

      1        SUSHIL KUMAR SHARMA
               AGED 56 YEARS
               S/O LATE RAMKUMAR SHARMA,
               PARTNER OF A.A. KAMAKSHYA RICE MILL, NARUGRAM P.O.,
               BARDWAN DISTRICT, WEST BENGAL 713101

      2        ABDUL VARISH C.P.,
               AGED 44 YEARS
               S/O. MUHAMMED BASHEER, TRADER, SHOP NO. 1,
               OLD PASSPORT OFFICER, NEAR BIG BAZAR,
               CALICUT 673 001

               BY ADV. SRI.JAISON JOSEPH

RESPONDENTS:

      1        STATE OF KERALA
               REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
               KERALA AT ERNAKULAM.

      2        MUHAMMED ASLAM,
               APK AGENCY MANAGING PARTNER OF APK AGENCY, THAIKKAVU
               P.O.,
               UNICHIRA, ERNAKULAM 682 021.


               R1 BY ADV.SRI.E.C.BINEESH,PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD              ON
24.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.MC.No.4145 OF 2019(G)

                                  2




                                ORDER

Cognizances was taken on a complaint

(annexure A1) for the offence under Section 406,

420 r/w Section 34 IPC on the allegation that the

rice supplied by the accused persons is not of the

standard agreed into by the parties. It is

pertaining to supply of five loads of rice for a

total amount of Rs.50,94,879/-, out of which

Rs.37,41,000/- was paid to the supplier. For the

balance amount of Rs.13,53,879/-, cheque was

issued, which was on presentation for encashment

dishonoured and returned. Hence proceedings under

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act

were initiated (annexure A2-complaint) against the

defacto complainant. Thereon, as a counter blast

the defacto complainant filed a complaint before

the learned Magistrate. The dispute involved is

of civil nature and it will not attract either the

offence under Section 406 or 420 IPC. The

quantity of the article supplied is a question to Crl.MC.No.4145 OF 2019(G)

be decided in a civil suit, for which no criminal

liability either under Section 420 or 406 IPC can

be fastened. As such, the complaint and the

cognizance taken thereon is hereby quashed.

The Crl.M.C. is allowed accordingly.

Sd/-

P.SOMARAJAN

JUDGE SPV Crl.MC.No.4145 OF 2019(G)

APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY RESPONDENT NO. 2 IN C.C. NO. 1334/2017 ON THE FILE OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT PAYYANNOOR

ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN C.R.

CASE NO. 455/2016 ON THE FILE OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT BURDWAN

ANNEXURE A3 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER SHEET IN C.R. CASE NO. 455/2016 ON THE FILE OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT BURDWAN.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE