Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
J.S. Khehar and R. Banumathi

JUDGMENT

R. Banumathi, J.

1. This appeal has been preferred assailing the judgment dated 17.03.2009 passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Criminal Petition No. 7901 of 2008 dismissing the petition filed by the Appellants Under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, thereby declining to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against the Appellants in CC No. 840/2008 Under Sections 419 and 420 Indian Penal Code.

2. Brief facts which led to the filing of this case are as under: The Respondent-complainant is a private limited company engaged in the manufacturing and marketing of scientific devices and equipments. The Respondent filed complaint against Appellant-International Advanced Research Centre for Powder Metallurgy and New Materials (for short 'ARCI') and its officers i.e. Appellant No. 2-S.V. Joshi, Associate Director and Appellant No. 3-G. Sunderarajan, Director alleging that the Appellants have represented that ARCI possessed of technology for manufacture of extruded ceramic honeycombs which is used in manufacturing of catalytic converters which are used in automobiles for controlling emission. On that representation, the Respondent entered into an agreement dated 18.06.1999 with ARCI for transfer of technology for the manufacturing process of extruded ceramic honeycombs inclusive of transfer of extrusion die fabrication technology which is an integral part of the manufacturing process for a consideration of rupees ten lakhs in instalments exclusive of royalty amount on the sales which would have been generated on the basis of products manufactured and marketed by the Respondent on the basis of technology. The Respondent had alleged that in pursuance of the agreement, the Respondent was permitted to establish its industrial unit within the campus of ARCI at Balapur, Hyderabad for the purpose of installing and commissioning production of preferred technology and for which Respondent spent around rupees one crore thirty lakhs for purchasing and installing the comprehensive machinery. The Respondent alleged that after having taken number of trial runs for testing the efficacy of the extruded ceramic honeycombs in the function organized by ARCI in May 2003, attended by higher officials, the technology was handed over to the Respondent and accordingly the Respondent was induced into remitting the third instalment of rupees two lakhs in addition to the amount already paid. Respondent states that he was informed that the initial trial runs conducted by the Scientists of ARCI succeeded and the Appellants thus, handed over a few samples of the final product which were subsequently displayed at a joint programme launched at Hyderabad. As a result, Respondent spent an amount of rupees fifteen lakhs for procuring raw materials in anticipation of commencing commercial production in the belief that the final perfected technology is in its hands. The Respondent further alleged that after three years, the Respondent was informed vide letter bearing No. ARCI/AD/2006-2007 dated 23.10.2006 addressed to Technology Information, Forecasting and Assessment Council (TIFAC) that the tar........