Instances Of Cheating & Duping Farmers Increasing Everyday, Systems Not Sensitive Towards Problems Faced By Farmers: Bombay High Court

Division bench of Justice TV Nalawade and Justice MG Sewlikar of the Aurangabad bench noted that since farmers have a lack of resources and cannot afford to indulge in litigation, this inability is capitalized upon by traders. Court said-

"The suicides of farmers are increasing day by day as farmers are facing all kinds of problems and present problem of cheating is additional circumstance which is compelling the farmers to commit the suicide. Due to all these circumstances, this Court holds that no relief can be granted in favour of applicants."

Case Background

The applicants in the case are Kailashchandra Khandelwal, his son Mayur Khandelwal and their accountant Akil Shaikh. The said case was registered against them with Savda Police Station, District Jalgaon for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 120-B and 34 of Indian Penal Code.

23-year-old Saniya Kadri is the complainant in the case, she was working as a broker in agricultural produce bananas at the time. According to her, on April 9, 2017, Mayur approached her at Savda and said that she can hand over bananas collected by her from farmers to him and he can find the traders who will give better prices to her and she can make more profit.

As there was the promise from Mayur that he will give a higher price, an agreement was made the next day.

As per the FIR, the informant has stated that a total of 248 deliveries of bananas was made in the aforesaid period to the applicants. She has also mentioned that from May 21, 2017 to June 18, 2017, no amount was given against any delivery by the applicants. It is her contention that the amount of around Rs.2.8 Crore was due from the applicants to her.

According to the complainant, she had collected bananas from farmers and groups of farmers by promising them to give price within a few days. Due to non payment by the applicants she could not give money to the farmers, the farmers started insisting to make payment. When she requested the applicants to give money, the applicants said that there is some financial crunch and she may give money to the farmers and after a few days they will make arrangements for the money. She contended that due to this promise she made payments of some farmers, but after that the applicants started avoiding her. When the remaining farmers were pressing hard for their demand, she insisted the applicants to make the payment of aforesaid amount and upon that the applicants said that she should accept 50% of the amount due for satisfaction of entire dues. It is Saniya's contention that she then realized that she was deceived by the applicants and so, she approached police.

Order

After going through the said agreement executed by applicant Mayur, the bench noted-

"It is mentioned that he was in a position to see that the informant gets a good price for bananas if bananas are sold through him in other States. It is mentioned that to make the transactions between applicant No. 1 and the informant legal, he was putting the agreement into writing. It is mentioned in the agreement that if he was not able to pay for the banana supplied, it was open to the informant to take legal action against him. The agreement shows that against each delivery, on the same day the price was to be paid and only if the applicant No. 1 had some difficulty in making the payment then by mutual agreement some time was to be given to him. This agreement is signed by applicant No. 1 and informant as parties to the agreement and two other persons have signed as witnesses."

Advocate KC Sant appeared on behalf of the applicants and submitted that the applicants are not admitting that there was agreement of aforesaid nature between applicant No. 1 and informant. He submitted that applicants are not admitting that the informant had handed over agricultural produce bananas to applicants for sale. Moreover, the applicants are not admitting that the payments were made and the amount due from them to the informant is more than Rs.2.8 Crore. The applicants are doing the transport business and due to that they had some transactions of supply of trucks for transport to the informant and it is the informant who was selling the banana directly to the traders, Adv Sant argued.

After going through the facts of the case, the bench observed-

"The record shows that applicant No. 1 (Mayur) had promised to give Saniya a higher price and a promise was given to pay the price of banana on the date of delivery itself. The record shows that accordingly, informant had promised to farmers to give higher price and make payment immediately after collecting the goods. The record shows that accordingly on first few days, the applicant gave higher rate and payments were made on the day of delivery. The news items and circumstances show that on those occasions farmers got higher price and the payment was made immediately.

However, afterwards the payments were not made and there are allegations of aforesaid nature against the applicants that they did not make payments afterwards. This record and circumstances show that it cannot be said that there is no record against the applicants to show their involvement in the offence committed against the farmers."

Finally, the bench said-

"The bilties of Khandelwal Transport were used. The receipts of weight prepared by weighbridge were made at the instance of Khandelwal Transport and there are statements to show that payments were made to applicant No. 3, the accountant of applicant Nos. 1 and 2. The allegations on the record show that applicant Nos. 1 an 2 received payment in respect of banana supplied by informant to applicant Nos. 1 and 2 which was sold by applicants. As per record they did not make the payment in respect of most of the agricultural produce to informant and in turn informant could not make payment to the farmers. Thus, it is the farmers who are in fact cheated."

Expressing surprise that the orders of anticipatory bail made by the Sessions Court were not challenged by the State, the bench dismissed the applications and observed-

"Such instances are increasing day by day. It is unfortunate, but it is a fact that all the systems are not showing sensitivity towards the problems faced by the farmers. The farmers have no resources and they cannot afford indulging into litigation. This inability of farmers is used by the traders like applicants and they make money on the agricultural produce which farmers gets after working hard.

The facts and circumstances show that first the atmosphere was created to lure the farmers and when the farmers started trusting, the plan was executed and payment was not made and the farmers were cheated."