AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Katju, J.—Heard Counsel for the parties.
This application under Section 482, Cr.P.C, has been filed for quashing the criminal complaint and proceedings under Sections 82 and 83, Cr.P.C. as well as for staying further proceedings in criminal case No. 66 of 1990, Union of India v. M/s. Rampur Bone Mills and others. A perusal of the complaint shows that the allegation against the applicant as contained in paragraph 5 is that the opinion stock was shown as 1,81,2507 whereas the closing stock in the last year was Rs. 2,31,150/ meaning there by that the stock has been shown in excess of Rs. 42,000/ in the opening balance. In paragraph 13of the counteraffidavit it has been stated that this difference does not qualify for prosecution. Thus it is no t a fit case for prosecution even according to the department.
The other allegation is regarding unexplained capital of Smt. Begum Sahiba of Rs. 7,755/. In my opinion, criminal prosecution should not be instituted on the basis of such minor additions otherwise in almost every case there will have to be a criminal prosecution. There is a difference between penalty and prosecution. In every case justifying penalty prosecution is not necessary. Hence merely because of some minor additions prosecution should not be started otherwise in almost every case there will have to be a prosecution.
in the circumstances this application is allowed. Criminal case No. 66 of 1990 pending before the Special CJM (Economic offences) Allahabad is quashed. Application allowed.