news details |
|
|
| HC declines to quash cheating proceedings against ex-Minister | | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Aug18- Declining to quash proceedings u/s 420 RPC against former Minister Raman Mattoo, Justice JP Singh of J&K High Court Jammu Wing, observed that there is no material on record to disbelieve the statement on oath of the respondent and his complaint which do make out prima-facie case for proceedings against Raman Mattoo u/s 420 (Cheating). The Court dismissed the petition filed by Mattoo seeking quashment of proceedings initiated against him by the Forest Magistrate Jammu vide Order dated September 30, 2005.
In his judgment, Justice Singh, observed that perusal of the agreement, statement of the respondent and other material on record indicate that the respondent has succeeded in proving prima-facie that he had been induced by the Raman Mattoo to withdraw complaint filed u/s 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, pursuant to dishonoring of the cheque issued by petitioner in favour of respondent for an amount of Rs 33 lakhs to discharge existing liabilities of clearing the arrears of his salary., which complainant he would not have otherwise so withdrawn, but for the petitioner’s inducement. Merely because the party may have civil remedy too, to pursue against his opponent, would not debar, the criminal court to proceed against the opposite party when it finds on the basis of the facts placed before it that an offence was prima-facie found to have been committed by the opposite party. The petitioner’ plea that the agreement having not come into operation and the respondent’s act of withdrawal of complaint was one sided affair is a factual plea which cannot be considered for its adjudication by this Court, in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction, for the plea needs consideration by the Trial Court at appropriate stage of the trial.
The court further observed that an Agreement appears to have been executed by the petitioner with the respondent on March 28, 2005, in terms the respondents had agreed to withdraw the complaint on petitioner’s assurance and agreement to pay him Rs 2 lakhs in cash besides 4 Kanals of land situated at Jammu. The agreement further indicate the petitioner too have agreed to withdraw FIR filed against the respondent u/s 379/420 RPC. Acting on the agreement, the respondent withdrew his complaint which was accordingly dismissed by the Judicial Magistrate Jammu on April 12, 2005. Respondent’s complaint against petitioner is that neither petitioner paid him Rs 2 lakhs nor transferred four kanals of land to the respondents in terms of the agreement. The complaint filed by the respondent resulted in its dismissal because of the petitioner’s inducement to pay him the amount agreed to and ownership right in four Kanals of land. The petitioner was stated to have cheated the respondent depriving of his right to pursue the complaint which he would not have withdrawn but for the petitioner’s inducement, the Court observed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
