:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4204 OF 2004 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4204 OF 2004 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4204 OF 2004 1. Maharashtra State Electricity ] Board, A body corporate formed under ] The Electricity Supply Act, 1948 ] having its head office at Prakashgad ] Bandra (East), Mumbai 400 051 ] 2. Shri M. R. Ambhore ] Technical Member (Gen.) ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] Prakashgad, Bandra (East), ] Mumbai 400 051 ] 3. Shri C. G. Thakare ] Technical Member (T & D) ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] Prakashgad, Bandra (East), ] Mumbai 400 051 ] 4. Shri H. A. Patil ] Technical Member (Distribution) ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] Prakashgad, Bandra (East), ] Mumbai 400 051 ] 5. Shri A. D. Khaparde ] Chief Engineer (Distribution) ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] Prakashgad, Bandra (E), ] Mumbai 400 051 ] 6. Shri S. N. Katakwar ] Superintending Engineer (Dist.) ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] Prakashgad, Bandra (East), ] Mumbai 400 051 ]Applicants versus 1. The State of Maharashtra ] 2. Datar Switchgear Limited ] A company registered under the ] Companies Act, 1956, having its ] :2: Corporate Office at F-8, D-Road, ] MIDC, Ambad, Nasik and Registered ] Office at Vakil Wadi, Nasik ] 3. Rajan Bhalchandra Datar ] Datar Farm, Anandvalli Shivar, ] Gangpur Road, Nasik ] 4. Dattatray Pandarinath Adke ] Senior Manager (Accounts) of ] Respondent No.2 having his office ] at "Suman", 64/20, Erandwala ] Pune 411 044 ]Respondents WITH WITH WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4300 OF 2004 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4300 OF 2004 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4300 OF 2004 Shri B. T. Mahale, 56 years ] Former Executive Engineer(Distribution) ] Presently Executive Engineer, ] Maharashtra State Electricity ] Board, Telecom Division, Chandra Nivas ] Building, Near Mukti Dham, Tilak Peth ] Nashik Road ]Applicant versus 1. The State of Maharashtra ] 2. Datar Switchgear Limited ] A company registered under the ] Companies Act, 1956, having its ] Corporate Office at F-8, D-Road, ] MIDC, Ambad, Nasik and Registered ] Office at Vakil Wadi, Nasik ] 3. Rajan Bhalchandra Datar ] Datar Farm, Anandvalli Shivar, ] Gangapur Road, Nasik ] 4. Dattatray Pandarinath Adke ] Senior Manager (Accounts) of ] Respondent No.2, having his office ] at "Suman", 64/20, Erandwala ] Pune 411 044 ]Respondents WITH WITH WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4606 OF 2004 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4606 OF 2004 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4606 OF 2004 :3: Shri G. K. Garg, age 55 years ] Deputy Executive Engineer (Nasik ] Urban Division) Maharashtra State ] Electricity Board, Nashik ]Applicant versus 1. The State of Maharashtra ] 2. Datar Switchgear Limited ] A company registered under the ] Companies Act, 1956, having its ] Corporate Office at F-8, D-Road, ] MIDC, Ambad, Nasik and Registered ] Office at Vakil Wadi, Nasik ] 3. Rajan Bhalchandra Datar ] Datar Farm, Anandvalli Shivar, ] Gangapur Road, Nasik ] 4. Dattatray Pandarinath Adke ] Senior Manager (Accounts) of ] Respondent No.2, having his office ] at "Suman", 64/20, Erandwala ] Pune 411 044 ]Respondents WITH WITH WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4687 OF 2004 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4687 OF 2004 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4687 OF 2004 Shri A. K. Pampattiwar, age 60 years ] Ex. Technical Director (Dist.) ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] Presently at 1st floor, Harsh Co-op. ] Housing Society, Savarkar Nagar, ] Nagpur - 25 ]Applicant versus 1. The State of Maharashtra ] 2. Datar Switchgear Limited ] A company registered under the ] Companies Act, 1956, having its ] Corporate Office at F-8, D-Road, ] MIDC, Ambad, Nasik and Registered ] Office at Vakil Wadi, Nasik ] 3. Rajan Bhalchandra Datar ] Datar Farm, Anandvalli Shivar, ] Gangapur Road, Nasik ] :4: 4. Dattatray Pandarinath Adke ] Senior Manager (Accounts) of ] Respondent No.2, having his office ] at "Suman", 64/20, Erandwala ] Pune 411 044 ]Respondents WITH WITH WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4715 OF 2004 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4715 OF 2004 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4715 OF 2004 Shri P. K. Kukde, age 61 years ] Ex. Technical Member ( T & D) ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] Presently at Tata Power Bombay House, ] Fort, Mumbai ]Applicant versus 1. The State of Maharashtra ] 2. Datar Switchgear Limited ] A company registered under the ] Companies Act, 1956, having its ] Corporate Office at F-8, D-Road, ] MIDC, Ambad, Nasik and Registered ] Office at Vakil Wadi, Nasik ] 3. Rajan Bhalchandra Datar ] Datar Farm, Anandvalli Shivar, ] Gangapur Road, Nasik ] 4. Dattatray Pandarinath Adke ] Senior Manager (Accounts) of ] Respondent No.2, having his office ] at "Suman", 64/20, Erandwala ] Pune 411 044 ]Respondents WITH WITH WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5901 OF 2004 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5901 OF 2004 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5901 OF 2004 1. Maharashtra State Electricity ] Board, A body corporate formed under ] The Electricity Supply Act, 1948 ] having its head office at Prakashgad ] Bandra (East), Mumbai 400 051 ] 2. Shri Arunkumar Mago ] Technical Member (Gen.) ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] :5: Prakashgad, Bandra (East), ] Mumbai 400 051 ] 3. Shri Allamshetty Krishna Rao ] Former Accounts Member ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] presently at "Saudamini", Haji Ali ] Worli, Mumbai ] 4. Shri P. K. Kukde ] Ex. Technical Member ( T & D) ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] Presently at Tata Power, Bombay House ] Fort, Mumbai ] 5. Shri A. K. Pampattiwar ] Ex. Technical Director (Dist.) ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] Presently at 1st floor, Harsh Co-op. ] Housing Society, Savarkar Nagar, ] Nagpur - 25 ] 6. Shri S. D. Kondejkar ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] 7. Shri H. A. Patil ] Technical Member (Distribution) ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] Prakashgad, Bandra (East), ] Mumbai 400 051 ]Applicants versus 1. The State of Maharashtra ] 2. Datar Switchgear Limited ] A company registered under the ] Companies Act, 1956, having its ] Corporate Office at F-8, D-Road, ] MIDC, Ambad, Nasik and Registered ] Office at Vakil Wadi, Nasik ] 3. Rajan Bhalchandra Datar ] Datar Farm, Anandvalli Shivar, ] Gangapur Road, Nasik ] 4. Dattatray Pandarinath Adke ] Senior Manager (Accounts) of ] Respondent No.2, having his office ] at "Suman", 64/20, Erandwala ] :6: Pune 411 044 ]Respondents WITH WITH WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5902 OF 2004 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5902 OF 2004 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5902 OF 2004 Shri Allamshetty Krishna Rao ] age 60 years, Former Accounts Member ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] presently at "Saudamini", Haji Ali ] Worli, Mumbai ]Applicant versus 1. The State of Maharashtra ] 2. Datar Switchgear Limited ] A company registered under the ] Companies Act, 1956, having its ] Corporate Office at F-8, D-Road, ] MIDC, Ambad, Nasik and Registered ] Office at Vakil Wadi, Nasik ] 3. Rajan Bhalchandra Datar ] Datar Farm, Anandvalli Shivar, ] Gangapur Road, Nasik ] 4. Dattatray Pandarinath Adke ] Senior Manager (Accounts) of ] Respondent No.2, having his office ] at "Suman", 64/20, Erandwala ] Pune 411 044 ]Respondents WITH WITH WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5904 OF 2004 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5904 OF 2004 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5904 OF 2004 1. Maharashtra State Electricity ] Board, A body corporate formed under ] The Electricity Supply Act, 1948 ] having its head office at Prakashgad ] Bandra (East), Mumbai 400 051 ] 2. Shri Ashok Basak ] ] ] Technical Member (Gen.) ] ] ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] Prakashgad, Bandra (East), ] Mumbai 400 051 ] ] ] :7: 3. Shri Allamshetty Krishna Rao ] Former Accounts Members ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] Presently at "Saudamini" Haji Ali ] Worli, Mumbai ] 4. Shri C. N. Gadge ] Former Chief Engineer (Dist.) ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] 5. Shri H.A. Patil ] Technical Director (Distribution) ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] Prakashgad, Bandra (East), ] Mumbai 400 051 ] 6. Shri B. T. Mahale ] Former Executive Engineer (Dist.) ] Presently Executive Engineer, ] Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] Telecom Division, Chandra Nivas Bldg. ] Near Mukti Dham, Tilak Path, ] Nashik Road ]Applicants versus 1. The State of Maharashtra ] 2. Datar Switchgear Limited ] A company registered under the ] Companies Act, 1956, having its ] Corporate Office at F-8, D-Road, ] MIDC, Ambad, Nasik and Registered ] Office at Vakil Wadi, Nasik ] 3. Rajan Bhalchandra Datar ] Datar Farm, Anandvalli Shivar, ] Gangapur Road, Nasik ] 4. Dattatray Pandarinath Adke ] Senior Manager (Accounts) of ] Respondent No.2 having his office ] at "Suman", 64/20, Erandwala ] Pune 411 044 ]Respondents WITH WITH WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3716 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3716 OF 2005 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3716 OF 2005 Shri H. B. Thakare, age 59 years ] :8: Maharashtra State Electricity Board ] Vidyut Colony No.2, Chhatri Talao Road ] Amaravati ]Applicant versus 1. The State of Maharashtra ] 2. Datar Switchgear Limited ] A company registered under the ] Companies Act, 1956, having its ] Corporate Office at F-8, D-Road, ] MIDC, Ambad, Nasik and Registered ] Office at Vakil Wadi, Nasik ] 3. Rajan Bhalchandra Datar ] Datar Farm, Anandvalli Shivar, ] Gangapur Road, Nasik ] 4. Dattatray Pandarinath Adke ] Senior Manager (Accounts) of ] Respondent No.2, having his office ] at "Suman", 64/20, Erandwala ] Pune 411 044 ]Respondents Mr. A. P. Mundargi, Senior Counsel with Mr. C. J. Sawant, Senior Advocate, Mrs. Deepa Chavan and Mr. Sanjeev Kadam for the for the Applicants. Mr. S. R. Borulkar, P.P. with Mrs. V. R. Bhosale, A.P.P. for the State. Mr. Adik Shirodkar, Senior Counsel with Mr. Chirag Balsara for the Respondent No.2 and with Mr. Vaibhav Joglekar for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 a/w. Mr. Luckyraj Indorkar i/b. Shaunak Satpute & Co. CORAM : D. G. DESHPANDE, & CORAM : D. G. DESHPANDE, & CORAM : D. G. DESHPANDE, & V. K. TAHILRAMANI,JJ. V. K. TAHILRAMANI,JJ. V. K. TAHILRAMANI,JJ. DATE : 4TH MAY, 2006 DATE : 4TH MAY, 2006 DATE : 4TH MAY, 2006 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER D. G. DESHPANDE, J.) : ORAL JUDGMENT (PER D. G. DESHPANDE, J.) : ORAL JUDGMENT (PER D. G. DESHPANDE, J.) : 1. Heard learned counsel for the Applicants, :9: learned PP, and Counsel for the Respondents. 2. All these Applications are arising out of Criminal Cases filed by the Respondent No.2 and others, for defamation, before the JMFC, Nasik. The Applications are filed for quashing the Complaints. The Applicants are the original accused and employees of Maharashtra State Electricity Board (MSEB). Datar Switchgear Limited was a Company. That MSEB had an agreement regarding supply of certain materials. The dispute arose between the MSEB and Datar Switchgear Limited. The matter was referred to Arbitration. The Arbitrators passed an Award. The MSEB filed Petition against that Award. That Petition was allowed and the Award was set aside. In the intervening period, there were proceedings in between the parties for perjury or contempt etc. Different Affidavits came to be filed on behalf of the MSEB through its different Officers. It is those Affidavits which have defamed the Complainant - Datar Switchgear Limited, and, therefore, they filed nine different complaint cases before the JMFC, Nasik, for defamation, against MSEB and its different Officers, who according to the Complainant had deliberately indulged in defaming :10: Datar Switchgear Limited. 3. In this background, we heard Mr. Mundargi, Senior Counsel for Applicants - MSEB, the learned P.P. and Mr. Adik Shirodkar, Senior Counsel for the Respondents. 4. Common submissions were made by both of them, though the facts of each of the complaint cases, were given separately, and, therefore, we are deciding all these Criminal Applications, by this common order. 5. Huge compilations of documents were filed by both the sides. We, openly told the counsels earlier, as well as, on the date of the arguments that we will be looking into the original complaints filed by Datar Switchgear Limited, the affidavits wherein defamatory statements were allegedly made. We, told them that we will not be going to any other aspect of the matter. Counsels relied upon different case laws, we, are not referring to any of them, as the case is decided purely on facts. 6. On one of the dates before the matters were :11: actually heard, we, had asked the counsel for the Complainant to give us a separate compilation comprising of the complaint and the relevant affidavits, in which defamatory statements were made. Accordingly, in all the nine matters separate compilation containing those documents was given and, we are, referring to those documents, about which no dispute was raised by any of the parties. Therefore, reference to the documents, by us, is from those specific compilation. 7. Criminal Application No. 4204 of 2004 arises out of Complaint Case where the accused are (1) MSEB, (2) Shri M. R. Ambhore, (3) Shri C. G. Thakare (4) Shri H.A. Patil, (5) Shri A. D. Khaparde and (6) Shri S. N. Katakwar. . Criminal Application No. 4300 of 2004 arises out of Complaint Case where there is only one accused Shri B. T. Mahale. . Criminal Application No. 4606 of 2004 arises out of Complaint case in which there is one accused Shri G. K. Garg. . Criminal Application No. 4687 of 2004 :12: arises out of Complaint case in which there is one accused Shri A. K. Pampattiwar. . Criminal Application No. 4715 of 2004 arises out of Complaint Case where there is one accused Mr. P. K. Kukde. . Criminal Application No. 5901 of 2004 arises out of Complaint Case, where the accused are (1) MSEB, (2) Srhi Arun Kumar Mago (3) Shri Krishna Rao, (4) Mr. P. K. Kukde, (5) Mr. A. K. Pampattiwar, (6) Mr. S. D. Kondejkar and (7) Mr. H. A. Patil. . Criminal Application No. 5902 of 2004 arises out of Criminal case where there is only one accused Shri Krishna Rao. . Criminal Application No. 5904 of 2004 arises out of Criminal case, where the accused are (1) MSEB, (2) Mr. Asoke Basak, (3) Shri A. Krishna Rao, (4) Mr. C. N. Gadge, (5) Mr. H. A. Patil and (6) Mr. B. T. Mahale. . Criminal Application No. 3716 of 2005 :13: arises out of Criminal case where there is only one accused Shri H. B. Thakare. 8. In the complaint before the Magistrate, which is the subject matter of Criminal Application No. 4204 of 2004, the complainant No.1 i.e. Datar Switchgear Limited, filed a Notice of Motion in the High Court being Notice of Motion No. 547 of 2003 dated 12.11.2003, wherein it is stated that accused No. 6 on the instruction, guidance, aid and abatement of Accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 filed and tendered in Court an affidavit dated 25th June 2004 for and on behalf of accused No.1 to oppose the Notice of Motion. In that affidavit, the accused made various defamatory statements against complainant No.1 with malicious intention to lower and injure the prestige, standing and reputation of the complainant No.1. There were allegations false to the knowledge of the accused, and, those were made inspite of express cautionary notice served by the complainant on the accused on 24.6.2004 9. What is defamatory in the said affidavit of accused No. 6 is given in paragraph Nos. 4 (i) and (ii), the same reads as under : :14: "4(i) .......the Complainant No.1 has been "4(i) .......the Complainant No.1 has been "4(i) .......the Complainant No.1 has been filing various proceedings when the filing various proceedings when the filing various proceedings when the Arbitration Proceedings were concluded on Arbitration Proceedings were concluded on Arbitration Proceedings were concluded on 2.4.04 itself and there was no occasion for 2.4.04 itself and there was no occasion for 2.4.04 itself and there was no occasion for any pressurising as imputed on 25.6.04, when any pressurising as imputed on 25.6.04, when any pressurising as imputed on 25.6.04, when the award was already published on 18.6.04. the award was already published on 18.6.04. the award was already published on 18.6.04. 4(ii) That the Accused falsely and 4(ii) That the Accused falsely and 4(ii) That the Accused falsely and libelously asserted that a C.I.D. enquiry libelously asserted that a C.I.D. enquiry libelously asserted that a C.I.D. enquiry has been ordered against the Complainant has been ordered against the Complainant has been ordered against the Complainant No.1 in respect of a fraud in respect of the No.1 in respect of a fraud in respect of the No.1 in respect of a fraud in respect of the LTLMS Contract and that the Complainant No.1 LTLMS Contract and that the Complainant No.1 LTLMS Contract and that the Complainant No.1 on being caught, refunded part of the amount on being caught, refunded part of the amount on being caught, refunded part of the amount withdrawn i.e. Rs.4 Crores in February 1999 withdrawn i.e. Rs.4 Crores in February 1999 withdrawn i.e. Rs.4 Crores in February 1999 but failed and neglected to refund the but failed and neglected to refund the but failed and neglected to refund the balance amount...." balance amount...." balance amount...." 10. In the complaint before the Magistrate, which is subject matter of Criminal Application No. 4300 of 2004, the defamatory statement is reproduced in paragraph 6, wherein it is stated : "Thus, the accused by using the Affidavits "Thus, the accused by using the Affidavits "Thus, the accused by using the Affidavits filed by him and Shri C. N. Gadge made and filed by him and Shri C. N. Gadge made and filed by him and Shri C. N. Gadge made and caused to be made an imputation before the caused to be made an imputation before the caused to be made an imputation before the Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in Contempt Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in Contempt Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in Contempt Petition No. 95 of 2002 that the Petition No. 95 of 2002 that the Petition No. 95 of 2002 that the Complainant No.1 had withdrawn over Rs.3.14 Complainant No.1 had withdrawn over Rs.3.14 Complainant No.1 had withdrawn over Rs.3.14 crores fraudulently..." crores fraudulently..." crores fraudulently..." 11. From the aforesaid quotation, it will be clear that the sole accused B. T. Mahale, in that case has relied upon and used the affidavit of C. N. Gadge and it was C. N. Gadge who had made allegations of fraud, therefore the sole accused B. T. Mahale has only repeated the defamatory :15: allegations in his affidavit recording "fraudulently "fraudulently "fraudulently withdrawing Rs.3.14 crores". withdrawing Rs.3.14 crores". withdrawing Rs.3.14 crores". 12. In the complaint before the Magistrate, which is the subject matter of Criminal Application No. 4606 of 2004, the allegation is that the sole accused G. K. Garg, has used the affidavits filed has used the affidavits filed has used the affidavits filed by Shri C. N. Gadge and B. T. Mahale made and by Shri C. N. Gadge and B. T. Mahale made and by Shri C. N. Gadge and B. T. Mahale made and caused to be made an imputation before the Hon’ble caused to be made an imputation before the Hon’ble caused to be made an imputation before the Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in Contempt Petition No. 95 of Mumbai High Court in Contempt Petition No. 95 of Mumbai High Court in Contempt Petition No. 95 of 2002 that the Complainant No.1 had withdrawn over 2002 that the Complainant No.1 had withdrawn over 2002 that the Complainant No.1 had withdrawn over Rs.3.14 crores fraudulently. Rs.3.14 crores fraudulently. Rs.3.14 crores fraudulently. 13. In the complaint before the Magistrate, which is the subject matter of Criminal Application No. 4687 of 2004, the sole accused A. K. Pampattiwar has used the affidavit of C. N. Gadge and B. T. Mahale wherein imputation was made by wherein imputation was made by wherein imputation was made by them in Contempt Petition No. 95 of 2002 that them in Contempt Petition No. 95 of 2002 that them in Contempt Petition No. 95 of 2002 that complainant No.1 had withdrawn over Rs.3.14 crores complainant No.1 had withdrawn over Rs.3.14 crores complainant No.1 had withdrawn over Rs.3.14 crores fraudulently. fraudulently. fraudulently. 14. In the complaint before the Magistrate, which is the subject matter of Criminal Application No. 4715 of 2004, the sole accused P. K. Kukde :16: filed complaint in response to the show cause notice. In paragraph 5 of the affidavit, the accused referred to and relied upon the affidavit filed by C. N. Gadge on behalf MSEB and further relying upon and repeating and reiterating the affidavit dated 6.9.2001 filed by B. T. Mahale in Writ Petition No. 1671 of 2001, it is alleged that: " Thus, the accused by using the affidavits filed by " Thus, the accused by using the affidavits filed by " Thus, the accused by using the affidavits filed by Shri C. N. Gadge and Shri B. T. Mahale made and Shri C. N. Gadge and Shri B. T. Mahale made and Shri C. N. Gadge and Shri B. T. Mahale made and caused to be made an imputation before the Hon’ble caused to be made an imputation before the Hon’ble caused to be made an imputation before the Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in Contempt Petition No. 95 of Mumbai High Court in Contempt Petition No. 95 of Mumbai High Court in Contempt Petition No. 95 of 2002 that the complaint No.1 had withdrawn over 2002 that the complaint No.1 had withdrawn over 2002 that the complaint No.1 had withdrawn over Rs.3.14 crores fraudulently". Rs.3.14 crores fraudulently". Rs.3.14 crores fraudulently". 15. In the complaint case before the Magistrate, which is the subject matter of Criminal Application No. 5901 of 2004, there were seven accused and it was alleged that the Arbitration Petition was filed by the respondents through accused No. 7 in the High Court being Arbitration Petition No. 285 of 2002. This petition was filed by MSEB - accused No.1 and in this petition, respondents made the following false and defamatory imputations against the Complainant Company in paragraph 4(a) and (b) as under: :17: (a) At para 35 of the said Petition, the (a) At para 35 of the said Petition, the (a) At para 35 of the said Petition, the Accused made a defamatory imputation that Accused made a defamatory imputation that Accused made a defamatory imputation that the Complainants were guilty of fraudulently the Complainants were guilty of fraudulently the Complainants were guilty of fraudulently obtaining loans on the basis of false obtaining loans on the basis of false obtaining loans on the basis of false representations. representations. representations. (b) At para 49, the Accused imputed that the (b) At para 49, the Accused imputed that the (b) At para 49, the Accused imputed that the Complainant Company fraudulently ensured Complainant Company fraudulently ensured Complainant Company fraudulently ensured that the Accused no longer had the security that the Accused no longer had the security that the Accused no longer had the security of a Bank Guarantee. of a Bank Guarantee. of a Bank Guarantee. It is further alleged that the Arbitration Petition filed by MSEB before the High Court came to be dismissed and the SLP before the Supreme Court also came to be dismissed. 16. In the complaint case before the Magistrate, which was the subject matter of Criminal Application No. 5902 of 2004, where sole accused Krishna Rao is there, it is alleged in paragraph 6 : "Thus, the Accused by using the Affidavits "Thus, the Accused by using the Affidavits "Thus, the Accused by using the Affidavits filed by Shri C. N. Gadge and Shri B. T. filed by Shri C. N. Gadge and Shri B. T. filed by Shri C. N. Gadge and Shri B.