Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Anil Bhargava And Ors. Versus State And Anr.

2008 (3) TMI 719 - DELHI HIGH COURT

Dated:- 7-3-2008 - S Muralidhar, J. JUDGMENT S. Muralidhar, J. 1. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeks the quashing of Complaint Case No. 458 of 2001 titled 'Air Force Group Insurance Society (AFGIS) v. PAAM Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and Ors.' under Sections 120B read with 404/415/420/467/468/471/477A Indian Penal Code (IPC) pending in the Court of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (MM), Delhi, in so far it concerns the three petitioners. 2. A .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

omplaint on 24th February 1999 against the same parties in respect of the dishonour of two cheques bearing Nos. 283825 for ₹ 4.5 lakhs and No. 283826 for Rs. One crore under Section 138 NI Act and 415/420 IPC. 3. A summoning order was passed on the second complaint on 23rd September 1999 by the learned MM. On the first complaint a separate summoning order was passed on 25th October 1999. 4. The AFGIS instituted a third complaint on 25th September 2000 in regard to the same set of transacti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

summoning order dated 12th November 2003 was passed, states that AFGIS made an investment of Rs. One crore with the Company for the subscription of non-convertible debentures (NCDs) of ₹ 100/- each earning a rate of 18 per cent per annum for a period of thirty-six months. It is stated that the Company pledged 5 lakh shares of the Company with the AFGIS as security till the debentures certificates were handed over. It is stated that despite the assurances, the complainant was not handed ov .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

is that in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in G. Sagar Suri v. State of U.P. , the subsequent complaint on the same set of facts was bad in law. He also relies upon the judgment in T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala 2001 II AD (Cr.) S.C. 513 to the effect that if on the same transaction a second FIR could not be registered, then by the same analogy a third complaint also could not have been registered. It is further pointed out that in terms of Clause 8(a)(ii) of the agreement entered into .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

present complaint. The first complaint filed on 1st December 1998 is by the same complainant AFGIS and the accused is shown as the Company, Shri Anil Bhargava (Petitioner No. 1 herein as its Chairman) and Arvind Bhargava (Petitioner No. 2 herein as its Director). Para 3 of the complaint refers to the fact that the Company approached AFGIS with a proposal inviting investment in privately placed NCDs of the Company for a sum of ₹ 5 crores for thirty-six months offering interest at 18 per ce .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in relation to the dishonor of the two cheques dated 31st December 1998 for a sum of ₹ 4.5 lakhs each. Neither of these complaints makes a reference to the fact that an agreement had been entered into between the Company and the AFGIS concerning latter's investment of ₹ 1 crore in the NCDs of the Company. They make no reference to the clauses of that agreement. 9. The third complaint CC No. 458 of 2001 filed by AFGIS on 25th September 2000 refers to the fact that a sum of Rs. On .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ishonoured. However, there is no mention of the fact that the two complaints had earlier been filed in respect of the dishonor of the cheques. 10. There can be no manner of doubt on a conjoint reading of the three complaints that they relate to the same set of facts. There is absolutely no explanation as to why the first two complaints did not advert to the fact of the deposit of five lakh shares of the Company with AFGIS as security. There is likewise no explanation why in the third complaint n .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uent criminal case on the same set of allegations and termed that as an abuse of the process of the court. In para 14, the Supreme Court in G. Sagar Suri observed as under: (SCC p. 645) 14. We agree with the submission of the appellants that the whole attempt of the complainant is evidently to rope in all the members of the family particularly those who are the parents of the Managing Director of Ganga Automobiles Ltd. in the instant criminal case without regard to their role or participation in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version