HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S.RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.6015 OF 2012 Dated 7-7-2014 Between:
P.Thangavelu.
And:
..Petitioner.
Kancherla Anjaneyulu and another.
…Respondents.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S.RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.6015 OF 2012 ORDER:
This petition is filed to quash F.I.R. in Cr.No.206 of 2008 of Pattabhipuram Police Station, Guntur for the alleged offences under Sections 420 and 406 I.P.C.
Heard advocate for petitioner.
It is submitted that the allegations in the complaint against the petitioner do not attract any offence and even according to complaint allegations, petitioner is only broker and the main contract was in between A.1 to A.3 and the de facto complainant. He further submitted that even the transaction of purchase of yarn was between A.1 to A.3 and de facto complainant, there is no privity of contract between the petitioner and the de facto complainant. He further submitted that A.4 and A.6 to A.8 filed criminal Petition No.7875 of 2009 to quash the proceedings and this court by an order dated 4-2-2011 quashed the proceedings against A.4 and A.6 to A.8 and allegation against them are similar to the allegation against the petitioner.
No arguments are advanced on behalf of respondent.
de facto complainant-1st
According 1st respondent, he is a manufacturer of yarn and in May, 2008, A.1 along with A.2 and A.3 with a local broker by name Vanama Venkateswarlu came to him and entered into a contract of purchase of yarn from the complainant and cheques were issued in pursuance of the concluded contract and out of them, one cheque is honoured and the other two cheques are dishonoured and in the complaint, it is contended that A.1 to A.3 in collusion with the broker cheated him and committed criminal breach of trust.
This court on the very same allegation against the other broker A.4 held that there is no privity of contract between the de facto complainant and the accused A.4 and even if the allegations in the complaint are taken for granted, there is no element of cheating much less criminal misappropriation committed by A.4 and A.6 to A.8.
As seen from the complaint, the allegation against the present petitioner is similar to that of A.4. Here this petitioner has also not purchased any yarn from the complainant and that there is no contract of any kind between the petitioner herein and the first respondent i.e., complainant. As rightly pointed out by advocate for petitioner, the earlier order of this court in respect of A.4, A.6 to A.8 squarely applies to this petitioner also and the complaint against this petitioner also is nothing but abuse of process of law which shall be curtailed by exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
For these reasons, this Criminal Petition is allowed quashing F.I.R.No.206 of 2008 of Pattabhipuram Police Station, Guntur, in respect of petitioner herein i.e., A.5.
As a sequel to the disposal of this Criminal petition, the Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending, shall stand dismissed.
JUSTICE S.RAVI KUMAR Dated 7-7-2014.
Dvs.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S.RAVI KUMAR Dvs CRIMINAL PETITION No.6015 OF 2012 Dated 7-7-2014