Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
OF 2016
Applicant
Versus
State of Maharashtra
Respondents
INDEX
Sr.
Particulars
No.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
PROFORMA
SYNOPSIS
CRIMINAL APPLICATION
Vakalatnama
Memorandum of Address
List of Documents
Exhbit A
Copy of Notice dated 23rd August 2016 issued
6.
by Respondent
Exhibit B
Copy of brief profile of the Directors of the
7.
8.
9.
8%
501
Kgs
total
amounting
Rs.2,00,963/-.
Exhibit E
Copy of the E-Mail dated 07.01.2015 sent by
10.
11.
of
reply/statement
sent
by
the
13.
1.
Son of
2.
Chattisgarh, 492001
Chattisgarh, 492001
APPLICANTS
Versus
...Responden
3. The Applicant No. 1 aged about 52 years is the Director of Ashoka Aluminium
Private Limited. The said company was operating in the field of Aluminium
Fabrication and Aluminium Alloy having its operation in the State of
Chattisgarh. The Applicant No.2 is also the Director of the said company and
is responsible for development of business and execution of the affairs of the
said Company. The Applicants were the Directors of erstwhile Ashoka
Aluminium Pvt. Ltd. having its office at Kumhari Ahiwara Road near Hingana
Nala, Durg (Chattisgarh) and were in business of Aluminium Fabrication,
Aluminium Extrusion and Aluminium Alloy, the said private limited company
was a reputed company of the State of Chattisgarh. It is submitted that the
company used to purchase a chemical named as Scot-Die lube which is used
in extrusion process for making profiles from Scottish Chemical Industries. As
and when the said good was purchased by the Ashoka Aluminium Pvt. Ltd. it
has promptly made the payment viz on 01.06.2013 the said chemical worth of
Rs.10,086.00 was purchased and on 05.07.2013 the payment was made.
Thereafter, on 12.08.2013, 18.09.2013 and 02.10.2013 a total goods of
Rs.30,201/- was purchased and accordingly on 10.10.2013 the Ashoka
Aluminium Pvt. Ltd. to the seller i.e. Scottish Chemical Industries. Thereafter,
the complainant Telephonically advised the Applicants to purchase a different
chemical imported from outside india which was used to make a better and
for extrusion plants and for cost cutting too so we have ordered on trial bases
of 500kgs and as per the sales executive it was mutually finalized that if the
material was not upto the mark than we will not be liable to pay for the trial
chemical used by the company. But after so much nonsense we agreed that
we are ready to paid for the 100 kgs aprox used by the company and after
that we asked them to send a credit note of the balance amount of which we
are returning the chemical but they refused very badly that you have to keep
material and you also have to pay the full amount of the bill. Thereafter, they
refused the payment for unused product. It is submitted that the said product
also called Scot-Boron 8% and it was assured by the complainant that the
said chemical is much better in comparison to the earlier one i.e. ScotDielube and thus, under the bonafide belief the Applicants placed the order
for purchase of said chemical. A copy of the ledger account demonstrating
the prompt payment by the applicants and copy of the Tax Invoice which
demonstrate that the complaint have sent the chemical Scot-Boron 8% 501
Kgs total amounting Rs.2,00,963/- is filed herewith as EXHIBIT C & D.
5.
That, when the Applicants have applied the chemical purchased by them for
used in furnace for making Aluminium Alloy it was found that the newly
purchased chemical is worthless to be used for the purpose of making and
therefore, the Applicants have made communication to the complainant
intimating him that newly purchased chemical is not up to the mark and thus,
a request was made to take off the unused chemical i.e. 400 Kgs. It was also
apprised by the Applicants that 100 Kgs of said chemical were used and thus,
they are ready to make the payment for the used chemical. The ledger
account annexed herewith as exhibit c clearly demonstrate that the Applicants
have already paid the amount of 100 Kgs of chemical which they have already
used. However, the complainant instead of taking of the unused chemical
started pressurizing the Applicants to make the payment for the entire
purchase and after sometime he has started threatening the Applicants on
phone for dire consequences. He often used abusive language against the
Applicants and when all the limits were crossed then in January 2015 the
Applicant No.2 has sent an E-Mail to the complainant and asked him not to
repeat such kind of abusive language in future and it was intimated that in
event of failure at the end of complainant a police complaint shall be lodged. A
copy of the E-Mail dated 07.01.2015 sent by the Applicant No.2 is annexed
herewith and marked as EXHIBIT E
6.
The complainant has not paid any heed on the said request and keep on
repeating
the
said
illegal
act
and
therefore,
the
7.
8.
11. It is submitted that on enquiry the Applicants at that juncture was informed by
the police personals that direction was issued from the Court to take
cognizance of the officer. Thereafter, on instruction the Counsel for the
Applicants visited the concern Court and obtained certified copy of the order
passed by the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate, Bandra, Mumbai under Section
156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. A true copy of the order dated 29.02.2016 passed by
Ld.
marked as Exhibit H.
GROUNDS
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
10
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
11
(k)
That the Honble Supreme Court and this Honble Court has held in
number of judgments that there is a clear distinction between
breach of Contract and offence of Cheating. The Respondent ought
to have applied his mind at the time of making the preliminary
inquiry in the Complaint.
(l)
(m)
That Respondent has failed to take note of the fact that anything
which is contrary to law cannot be passed on to an individual
member in order to satisfy an individual members personal benefit.
(n)
That the FIR No. 6 of 2016 registered against the Applicants does
not disclose any offence and hence it is liable to be quashed.
(o)
12
(p)
(q)
The Applicants have not filed any other petition in any other courts
either in State of Maharashtra or in any part of India
(r)
(s)
13
a. That this Honble Court may be please to quash the First Information
Report No. 6 of 2016 filed by the Respondent against the Applicants
under Section 420, 504, 506 (2)/34 of Indian Penal Code;
b. That in pending the hearing and final disposal of the petition, this
Honble Court be please to stay the proceedings, investigations
initiated by the Respondents after the Registration of the First
Information Report No. 16 of 2016 and subsequent proceedings
initiated against the Applicants;
c. Ad-interim in respect to prayer clause ( b );
d. Any other order in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience.
Applicant
VERIFICATION
I, ______________, the Applicant No.1 in the said Application, having my
Office address at _______________________________
do hereby
14
)
)
Before me,
Identified by me,
Advocate for the Applicants
15
Applicants
Versus
State of Maharastra and Anr.
...Respondents
--------------------------------CRIMINAL APPLICATION
---------------------------------