1 Appln: 3555/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3555 OF 2010 Jagdish N. Patel .... Applicant Navsari, Gujarat Vs. State of Maharashtra .... Respondents Mr. S.H. Mishra, Advocate for applicant. Mr. P.S. Hingorani, APP for State. Coram : Smt. R.P.SondurBaldota, J. Date : 11th January, 2011 P.C. 1. This application filed under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure is for quashing of Criminal Case No.227/PW/2006 for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, 25th Court, Mazgaon, Mumbai. 2. One Taslim Iqbal Tambawala complained to the Police on 15th June 2005 alleging breach of trust and cheating on the part of the applicant. The facts alleged in the complaint are that in the year 1999, the complainant had handed over 200 shares of Sterlite Industries standing in the names of his wife Taslim and his cousin, Mallika to the transfer agent PCS Industries Limited for the purpose of transfer to the joint names of himself and his wife. He 2 Appln: 3555/2010 received 100 shares duly transferred as per his request. As regards the balance 100 shares, the transfer agent informed him by the letter dated 15th September 1999 that the transfer could not be effected as the signatures on the transfer application did not tally with the original signatures. Later by its letter dated 17th March 2000, the transfer agent informed the complainant that 100 shares had been wrongly transferred to the name of the applicant, who is a share broker carrying on business in the name of Prime Investment at Navsari. The complainant was requested to collect the shares directly from the applicant. A copy of the letter dated 17th March 2000 had been forwarded by the transfer agent to the applicant. When the complainant visited the applicant at Navsari for return of the shares, the applicant promised him that he would look into his records and return the shares. As he did not return the shares, the complaint came to be filed. 3. The applicant contends firstly that he cannot be made to suffer prosecution for the mistake committed by the transfer agent of the complainant, secondly that according to him, the owners of 100 shares ought to have filed a suit in a competent civil court to establish their claim and thirdly that the complainant being a mere proposed buyer (transferee), it cannot be said that he suffered any loss in consequence of non transfer of 100 shares in his name. 3 Appln: 3555/2010 4. There is no substance in any of the contentions. The first two contentions need to be only stated to be rejected. As regards the third contention, the same is a matter of evidence. The power of the court under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the proceedings is an extraordinary power. It is required to be exercised by the court only for the purpose of prevention of abuse of process of law or otherwise to secure ends of justice. The facts of the instant case do not make out either of the situations. It also cannot be said that no offence is made out by the facts alleged in the complaint. Hence, the application is dismissed. (Smt. R.P.SondurBaldota, J)