HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION NO.547 OF 2007 Date: 27.01.2010 Between: I. Venkata Rama Raju and 3 others ……Petitioners And: The State of A.P., rep. by the S.H.O, I Town P.S. Jajahmundry and another ……Respondents. HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION NO.547 OF 2007 ORDER: This petition is filed by the accused Nos.1 to 4 under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing proceedings in C.C.No.465 of 2006 on the file of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Rajahmundry relating to offence punishable under Section 406 I.P.C. There is no dispute that the complainant/2nd respondent and 9 others including A-1 to A-4 formed into partnership under the name and style of M/s. D.N.R. Poultries. Business of the firm was carried on at Radha Mohanpur in Orissa state. It is alleged that the 2nd respondent invested Rs.10,00,000/- in the business and that the accused failed to render true and proper accounts of the business and failed to pay his share of profits and investments and that A-1 to A-4 acquired several properties in their names with funds relating to the firm. A-1 is brother-in-law of the 2nd respondent. A-2 is wife of A-1. A-3 is grand father of A-1. A-4 is maternal uncle of A-1. Thus all the parties are closely related to each other. There is no dispute that after giving legal notice to all the partners, the 2nd respondent filed O.S.No.66 of 2008 in I Additional District court, West Godavari at Eluru for rendering true and proper accounts of the partnership business and for payment of his share of profits and investment therein. That suit is pending. Prior to filing of that suit, the 2nd respondent filed the present complaint in the lower court against A-1 to A-4 only, leaving other four partners. It is contended by the petitioners’ counsel that dispute between the parties is one which is purely of civil nature and that the lower court should not have taken cognizance thereof. As per partnership deed, D. Narasimha Raju (A-3), P.V. Satya Marraju and I.V. Rama Raju (A-1) are three Managing Partners of the business. Further, P.V. Satya Marraju and A-1 were entrusted with duties of operating bank accounts of the firm. P.V. Satya Marraju is not impleaded as one of the accused in this case. It is stated by the 2nd respondent’s counsel that P.V. Satya Marraju was not included in array of the accused as he did not acquire any properties with partnership funds. Inspite of it, as per partnership agreement, he is also one of the Managing Partners. Ultimately, it is all the Managing Partners who have to render accounts of the business to all the partners. It is stated that the civil suit is filed by the 2nd respondent against all the other partners. Further, A-2 and A-4 are not Managing Partners. Inspite of it, criminal case was filed against A-2 and A-4 also even though they have no duty as per partnership deed to render true and proper accounts of business of the firm. It is evident that the 2nd respondent had picked and chosen persons from the partnership in this case. It is evident that after realizing that a criminal case like the present one may not serve the purpose of forcing Managing Partners to render accounts of the firm, the 2nd respondent has chosen to file civil suit in the District court, West Godavari. At this stage, no material is placed to prima facie show that any of A-1 to A-4 purchased any properties in their individual names much less with funds drawn from the partnership business. It is evident that the present complaint is filed with a view to coerce and to arm-twist A-1 to A-4 to arrive at some settlement. I have no doubt in my mind that the criminal complaint is nothing but sheer abuse of process of criminal law. A civil dispute is converted into a criminal mater by filing the present complaint. I am of the view that the present criminal case does not prima facie prove existence of ingredients of offence punishable under Section 406 I.P.C and that it is a case which is purely one of civil nature. In the result, the criminal petition is allowed quashing proceedings in C.C.No.465 of 2006 on the file of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Rajahmundry. ___________________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU,J Date:27.01.2010. Gk. HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION NO.547 OF 2007 Date: 27.01.2010 Gk.