Crl.A. No.103 of 2009 1

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 103 of 2005

CHEPURI ASHOK & ANR. ..... APPELLANTS

VERSUS

 PRAYAKA RAO VENUKUMAR & ANR.      .....  RESPONDENTS

O R D E R

1. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The appellants before us are partners Nos. 7 and 8  

Ashok and Krishna Kumari, as per the partnership deed  

dated 8th January, 2001.  From Clauses 8 and 9 of the  

partnership deed, it is apparent that the partners other  

than the appellants were in fact conducting the day to  

day business of the partnership and that the appellants  

were infact sleeping partners.  In the First Information  

Report  as  also  the  Protest  Petition  filed  by  the  

complainants there is no allegation whatsoever that the  

appellants had in any manner misconducted themselves and  

the  only  broad  allegation  was  that  the  Statement  of  

Accounts  that the complainant was entitled to receive  

was not being shown to him.   

3. In the course of arguments, before us, the learned

Crl.A. No.103 of 2009 2

counsel  for  the  complainant  has  argued  that  the  

appellants were in fact running the business although  

the partnership deed did not indicate so.  We have gone  

through the statement made by the complainant in the  

Protest Petition and find there is no such allegation  

against the appellants even in that statement.  The only  

allegation  which  is  made  against  the  appellants  and  

admitted by them is that they were partners in the firm.  

On this score. there is no dispute between the parties.  

An  over  all  reading  of  the  complainant,  the  First  

Information  Report,  the  Protest  Petition  and  the  

documents on record, indicate that the appellants had no  

role to play in any kind of criminal misconduct.   

4. We, therefore, allow this appeal, set aside the  

order  of  the  High  Court  and  direct  that  no  further  

proceedings shall go on against the appellants.  We,  

however,  clarify  that  notwithstanding  this  order,  it  

would be open to the complainant to take all steps on  

the civil side for vindicating his claim.

..............................J [HARJIT SINGH BEDI]

..............................J

Crl.A. No.103 of 2009 3

[CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD]

NEW DELHI MARCH 16, 2011.