1 WP-2714-10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Mhi CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2714 OF 2010 Shri Amit Narendra Doshi ) Age: 34 years, Occ: Business ) Partner of M/s. Crystal Construction Co. ) R/o Karuna Sagar, Near Bank of ) Maharashtra , 267, Devdhar Road, ) Matunga (Centre), Mumbai 400 019. ). Applicant Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra ) (Through P.I., Deolali Camp ) Police Station) )' 2. Mr. Haresh Pravinchanda Ajmera ) Age: 53 years, Occ: Business ) Partner of Crystal Construction ) Co. Ltd. a partnership firm having ) its office at R/o. Shree Shatrunjay, ) Lam Road, Opp. Kothari Sanatorium ) Deolali Camp, Nashik 422 401 ) 3. Diamond Co-operative Housing ) Society Ltd., ) Shri Chimanlal P. Mehta ) B-9, Diamond Co-operative Housing ) Society, M.Road, Deolali Camp, ) District: Nashik. )..Respondents Ms. Nisha Valani,Advocate, for the petitioner Mr.P.S.Hingorani,APP, for the respondent No.1 - State. Mr. V.V.Purwant, i/b. Mr. Nitin Mulye, Advocates, for respondent No.2. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA,J. DATE : 8th March, 2011. 2 WP-2714-10.sxw JUDGMENT: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard. 2. Respondent No.2 filed a complaint against the present petitioner under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC and was registered as RCC No.859/2009 in the Court of J.M.F.C. Nashik Road at Nashik. 3. The complaint reveals that the complainant, who is present petitioner, and four other persons are partners of Crystal Construction Company. That firm came into existence in May 1996 and was engaged in the business of builders, developers and consultants. The owners of certain lands situated at Village Sandari executed a general power of attorney in favour of M/s.Crystal Construction Company and 41 residential tenements were constructed by the firm. According to the complainant, he had sold 38 tenements in the complex and the sale proceeds have been accounted for in the accounts of the firm. The accused/petitioner, without the consent of other partners,sold the remaining tenements and received amount of Rs.29,50,000/- and also executed final sale deed in favour of Diamond Park Co-op Housing Society formed by the purchasers of the said tenements. According to the complainant, some of the purchasers had not made payment and therefore sale deed should not have been executed. 3 WP-2714-10.sxw According to him, the accused has not accounted for the amounts received by him by sale of the tenements. 4. In view of the facts noted above, it appears that the accused, who is also partner of the firm, sold away 3 tenements and one bunglow, but he has not brought that money in the accounts of the firm. He did not take consent of the other partners while executing the sale deed in favour of Diamond Co-op. Housing Society. This is allegation of mismanagement of the business of the firm and maintenance of the accounts. If any of the partners of the firm is not satisfied with the management, the proper remedy is to file proceedings for dissolution of partnership and for accounts. It is purely a civil matter between the partners and no case is made out under Sec. 406 or 420 of IPC. 5. Therefore, the petition is allowed and the proceedings in the criminal case are quashed. Rule made absolute accordingly. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)