Order 1

Order Details: Order Below EX 1
Pdf Text: C.C.No.1340/SS/2019
Order Below Exh.12
MHMM180093432019
C.C.No.1340/SS/2019
Eureka Forbes Private Limited Vs.
Tejesh Hindurao Mandhare
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, 58TH COURT, BANDRA,
MUMBAI
ORDER BELOW APPLICATION EXH.12
1. This is an application for granting interim compensation to the
complainant vide section 143(A) of Negotiable Instrument Act.
2. It is contended on behalf of the complainant that accused is
involved in misappropriation of funds of the complainant company. He
purchased inferior quality of gift items on behalf of the complainant company
and misused money of the complainant. Further he admitted his liability
after the forensic audit by the complainant company and in pursuance to the
admission of liability he gave the cheques in question. Hence this application.
3. The accused objected the application, vide reply Exh.13.
According to him he was Asstt. Officer and the Senior Manager was Mr.
Joseph George. The complaint is filed keeping bias against him out of
personal rivalry in between Mr. Joseph George and the complainant of
present case. The cheques in question are obtained forcibly kidnapping him
threatening him. In short he is not liable to pay the cheque amount nor the
cheques are issued against discharge of legal liability.
4. Heard Advocate Shradha Chedda for the complainant and
Advocate Kiran Jadhav for the accused.
5. On hearing both sides, it is crystal clear that after forensic audit,
complainant company obtained the cheque in question from the accused. No
-- 1 of 3 --
… 2 … C.C.No.1340/SS/2019
Order Below Exh.12
domestic inquiry was carried out against the delinquent employee that is
present accused and said Senior Manager Joseph George by the complainant
company. Therefore, there is reason to believe prima facie obtaining cheques
under threat, coercion as contended by the accused. Furthermore, the
accused is Junior Supervisor, number of other officers are involved in the
process of purchasing gifts, giving purchase orders. The liability even if arises
is joint liability of number of persons involved in this scam. The accused can
not be held solely liable for alleged misappropriation of funds.
6. The legality and validity of cheque is in question and disputed
by the accused. The complainant company has also filed FIR for the offence
punishable u/sec.420 of Indian Penal code against accused after more than
one year of date of offence. Needless to state that section 143(A) of Cr.P.C.
aims to speedy justice to the complainant. However, this seems not a fit and
genuine case to exercise powers conferred upon this court u/sec.143(A) of
Cr.P.C. without going through the trial and marshaling evidence of the parties.
So also this court is of opinion that the parties needs to be directed to go for
trial and lead proper evidence, instead of granting interim compensation.
Hence, I pass following order.
ORDER
1. The application is rejected.
2. Order dictated and pronounced in open court.
Mumbai, (M. P. Saraf)
Dated : 29.08.2023. Metropolitan Magistrate,
58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
J.O.Code – MH01362
-- 2 of 3 --
… 3 … C.C.No.1340/SS/2019
Order Below Exh.12
CERTIFICATE
I affirm that the contents of this P.D.F. file Order are same, word to word as per the
original Order.
Name of Stenographer : Mrs. Aditi Ravikiran Dalvi
Court : Metropolitan Magistrate, 58th Court, Bandra,
Mumbai.
Dictated in open court on : 29.08.2023.
Transcribed and Typed on : 29.08.2023.
Order printed and Signed on : 29.08.2023.
Order Uploaded on : 30.08.2023.
-- 3 of 3 --