AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N. Ananda
The petitioner has sought for quashing of the first information registered in Crime No. 561/2006 for offences punishable under Sections 23, 24, 25, 405 and 406 IPC.
Heard learned Counsel appearing for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the State.
The first information report, was registered on the basis of complaint initiated by the second respondent alleging non-delivery of certain consignments entrusted to petitioner. The complainant was referred u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C.
The learned Counsel for petitioner would submit that the transaction relates to the year 1994. At fee first instance, the second respondent had sought relief under The Consumers Protection Act, 1986 and he was unsuccessful throughout. The petitioner was also unsuccessful before the Supreme Court, After the termination of the civil proceedings, the second respondent had initiated the complaint to harass the petitioner, The learned Counsel for petitioner would submit that the dispute is of civil nature If the petitioner were to appear before Investigating Officer, the petitioner would he coerced.
In a petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. this Court can not resolve formal controversies. It is seen from the record that M/s. Carriers/Agents arrayed as second accused has not challenged the first information registered in Cr.No. 581/2006.
The learned Government Pleader has, drawn my attention to the Police Notice issued to petitioner.
This notice is addressed to the Manager, M/s.Forbeas Gokak Limited without mentioning the name of any individual In the notice, the first petitioner has been called upon to produce the documents in his custody.
In the circumstances, the apprehension of petitioner if he were to appear before the Investigating Officer he would be coerced is unfounded. As directed in the notice, petitioner is at liberty to produce before the investigating Officer, all the documents which are in favour of petitioner and against second respondent, In such an event, the Investigating Officer shall consider the documents to arrive at a conclusion as to whether the dispute is of civil nature". Even after production of documents and on consideration of documents, if the Investigating Officer were to file a final report against the petitioner, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the same.
The petition is disposed of with the above observations.