1 This application is filed by one of the Directors of Sigma Fores Services Private Limited, original accused No.1, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [for short, 'the Code'] with a prayer to quash FIR being I-C.R. No.34 of 2011 filed by respondent No.2 with D.C.B. Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
2 It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has neither accepted the amount as alleged nor there was a franchise agreement in existence when the alleged offence is committed. That, the applicant is falsely implicated in the offence. Further, the complaint does not disclose ingredients of the offences and it is clear abuse of process of law undertaken by the complainant.
3 Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record.
4 On a reading of the complaint and other documents on record, in my view, at this stage the allegations levelled against the applicant of accepting amount of Rs.1 lakhs along with another Director of F.K. Sons, namely, Wasim Chisti, Nizam Chisti, Khursid Chisty and their agents Raju Saiyed and Munna Saiyed, reveal that a case is made out for investigation by the Investigating Agency. The contentions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant are in the arena of defence. Hence, this is not the stage when the Court would make an inquiry into the factual position to find out as to whether or not the applicant is guilty of the charges or not. Under the circumstances, this Court would not be justified in staying the investigation or quashing the complaint. Hence, no case is made out to exercise power under Section 482 of the Code to quash the impugned complaint and this application is rejected summarily.
(ANANT S. DAVE, J.) (swamy) Top