Narender Singh & Ors v. State NCT of Delhi & Ors

S. MURALIDHAR, J. FEBRUARY 26, 2008 dn

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: January 28, 2008 Date of decision: February 26, 2008 CRL.M.C. 6707 of 2005 & CRL.M.A. 12572 of 2005 & CRL.M.A. 8228 of 2006 NARENDER SINGH & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through Mr. Sanjay Suri and Mr. Jeevesh Mehta, Advocates. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through Mr. Sunil K. Mittal, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in Yes Digest? Dr. S. Muralidhar, J. 1. By this petition under Section 482 CrPC the Petitioners seek the quashing of FIR No. 941 of 2003 under Sections406/420/506/120B/34 IPC registered at Police Station Kalkaji and all proceedings pursuant thereto. 2. The Petitioners state that they are carrying on business of retail sale of gold ornaments and diamond jewellery and have been running a show room since 1972. The business is a partnership started by their father in the name of Satkar Jewellers which has been registered under the sales tax and excise laws. The case of the complainant SRG Pvt. Ltd Respondent No.2 is that the complainant also deals in the business of sale and manufacturing of jewellery. It is stated that the petitioners accused contacted the complainant for the purpose of entering into regular transactions for purchase of jewellery items made from precious metals on a wholesale basis. Payments were made against regular purchases and thereafter once the volume of transactions increased, jewellery was sold to the accused against post-dated cheques. When the cheques began to get dishonoured, the complainant made a demand for payment. It is stated that a sum of Rs.33,45,693/- became due and outstanding from the accused persons. It is then stated as under: "That all the accused persons are family members and have tendered the deep conspiracy to cheat the complainant of his valuable money/goods for including him to deliver the goods to them which he would have never delivered if he would have known their dishonest intention. Since from the beginning to cheat the complainant and the accused persons have committed a criminal breach of trust as the goods were entrusted to the against consideration and the accused were required to make the payment and honour their commitment on the due dates of the cheques, which they intentionally did not fulfill." 3. The FIR also states as under in para 14: "14. That the complainant now tried to find out their status and position in the market and came across and met several other persons, who were also cheated in a similar manner and their modus operandi for cheating all the persons is one and the same and a no. of case have been filed against the accused persons are facing trial in these case at various places. Copy of few cases is enclosed as annexure "B" with this complaint for kind perusal of this Hon"ble Court." Thereafter a separate averment is made regarding an incident of 12th September 2003 in para 15 which reads as under: "That the accused persons finally called the complainant on 12.09.2003 at their shop on the pretext of settling the matter and the complainant went there alongwith Pushkar his employee and found that Sh. Surender Singh, Narender Singh and Arvinder Singh alongwith Smt. Upinder Kaur and Smt. Arvinder Kaur and when the complainant demanded for money or the return of the goods, all the three accused persons got angry and started abusing the complainant in a filthy language and took out their kirpans and threatened to kill the complainant, if the complainant will visit their shop in future and will demand the money. The accused had also calls 4-5 other persons who were looking like gunda elements, whom the complainant can identify on being produced, who were also supporting the accused and threatened the complainant and his family members. The complainant was forced to leave the place by all the persons an