JUDGMENT : Z.A. Haq, J. 1. Though served, none appeared for the non-applicant No.2 on 06-07-2015, 27-11-2015, 18-12-2015. None appeared for the non-applicant No.2 when the matter was called out today. Heard Shri A.A. Naik, Advocate for the applicant and Ms. N.P. Mehta, Additional Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant No.1. 2. The applicant has challenged the order passed by the Sessions Court dismissing the revision filed by the applicant and maintaining the order passed by the learned Magistrate, directing issuance of process against the applicant in complaint case filed by the non-applicant No.2, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 418 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The non-applicant No.2 has filed complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the applicant and two others alleging that the present applicant (accused No.2) is authorised representative of accused No.1-Company and accused Nos. 1 and 2 had placed two purchase orders through accused No.3 with the complainant, that the complainant had manufactured quality of yarn as per the specifications given by the accused Nos. 1 and 2, however, the accused have lifted only Nos. two containers of yarn as per the first contract and in spite of assurance of giving continuous orders the accused have avoided to place further orders with the complainant. It is alleged by the complainant that the accused had given the assurance of regular and continuous orders and therefore, the complainant had supplied two containers of yarn at extremely competitive rates and the complainant would not have done so but for the assurance given by the accused. With these allegations, the complainant prayed that the accused be punished for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 418 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Magistrate called for report under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and after examining it and the documents on the record, by the order dated 16-06-2012 directed issuance of process against the accused (including the applicant) for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 418 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant, being aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Magistrate, filed revision before the Sessions Court, which is dismissed by the impugned order. The applicant, being aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Magistrate, filed revision before the Sessions Court, which is dismissed by the impugned order. The learned Additional Sessions Judge concluded that there is sufficient material against the applicant to direct the issuance of process and that there are sufficient allegations against the applicant to show that she was involved in the alleged transactions. The applicant, being aggrieved in the matter, has filed this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 4. After hearing the learned Advocate for the applicant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant No.1 and after going through the documents placed on the record of the application, I find that the complaint filed by the non-applicant No.2 does not make out prima-facie case for issuance of process against the applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 418 and 420 of the Indian Penal code. The dispute between the parties, if any, is purely of civil nature. The ingredients necessary to constitute the offences under Sections 406, 418 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code are not even pleaded/averred by the non-applicant No.2. The learned Magistrate as well as the learned Additional Sessions Judge have failed to advert to this relevant point, therefore, the impugned orders are unsustainable. 5. Hence, the following order : (i) The order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Criminal Revision No.366/2012 on 22-5-2014 is set aside. (ii) The order passed by the learned Magistrate in Criminal Complaint Case No.61/2011 on 16-06-2012 directing issuance of process against the applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 418 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code is quashed. (iii) The complaint filed by the non-applicant No.2 against the applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 418 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code is dismissed. (iv) The criminal application is allowed in the above terms. In the circumstances, the parties to bear their own costs. Order accordingly.