Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Issuance of summons, duty of Magistrate – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.406, 504 and 506 – Commercial dispute given criminal colour – Dispute between the parties related to the rate at which the assigned work was to be done – Respondent no.2 filed complaint case – Summons issued by Magistrate for trial u/ss.406, 504 and 506, IPC – Application filed by the appellant for quashing the summons and the complaint case, dismissed by High Court – Propriety: Held: Past commercial relationship between the appellant’s employer and the respondent no.2 was admitted – Dispute between the parties centred around the rate at which the assigned work was to be done – Neither in the complaint petition nor in the initial deposition of the two witnesses (including the complainant), the ingredients of the offence u/s.405, IPC surfaced – Such commercial disputes over variation of rate cannot per se give rise to an offence u/s.405, IPC without presence of any aggravating factor leading to the substantiation of its ingredients – No material to come to a prima facie finding that there was dishonest misappropriation or conversion of any material for the personal use of the appellant in relation to gas supplying work done by the respondent no.2 – The said work was done in course of regular commercial transactions – There was no misappropriation or conversion of the subject property, being Dissolved Acetylene Gas which was supplied to the factory for the purpose of battery manufacturing at EIL – No evidence for commission of offence u/s.405/406, IPC – Further, as regards criminal intimidation also there was a mere bald allegation, short of any particulars as regards to the manner in which threat was conveyed – While it is true that at the stage of issuing summons a magistrate only needs to be satisfied with a prima facie case for taking cognizance, the duty of the magistrate is also to be satisfied whether there is sufficient ground for proceeding – Magistrate’s order issuing summons reflects his satisfaction in a cryptic manner – At the stage of issue of summons, though detailed reasoning as to why a Magistrate is issuing summons is not necessary but in the present case, the allegations made by the complainant do not give rise to the offences for which the appellant was summoned for trial – A commercial dispute, which ought to have been resolved through the forum of Civil Court was given criminal colour by lifting certain words or phrases from the penal code and implanting them in a criminal complaint – Magistrate failed to apply his mind in issuing summons and the High Court failed to exercise its jurisdiction u/s.482, 1973 Code – Impugned judgment set aside, complaint and summoning order quashed. [Paras 14, 17 and 18] Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Jurisdiction – Discussed.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Summons issued by Magistrate for trial u/ss.406, 504 and 506, IPC in the complaint case filed by Respondent no.2 – Appellant sought dismissal of the complaint on the ground that the complaint should not have been entertained without arraigning the principal company as an accused:
Held: The perceived wrongdoing was attributed to the appellant, though the complaint petition acknowledges that the job-work was being done for EIL (appellant’s employer) – Moreover, the allegation of criminal intimidation was against the appellant directly, whatever be the value or quality of such allegations – Thus, for that reason the complaint case cannot be rejected at the nascent stage on the sole ground of not implicating the company – However, the complaint and the summons quashed for the reasons given. [Para 20]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.