Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2015 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (12) TMI 1293 - HC - Indian LawsComplaint under Section 138 read with Section 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Held that:- In the instant case, it is submitted that evidence has already been concluded before the trial Court and the case was at the stage of recording statements of petitioner and other co-accused named in the complaint, under Section 313 Cr.P.C. There is specific averment in the complaint that on the representation of the petitioner and other coaccused, the MOU was signed. The mere fact that the cheque issued by respondent No.2 and the MOU signed by respondent No.2 do not bear the signature of petitioner, make out no case for quashing of the complaint and summoning order at this stage when the evidence of complainant has already been concluded. When the entire evidence before the trial Court is complete, it is not appropriate to record finding on the contention of petitioner that he was not the Director of the company at the time of issuance of cheque or was not responsible to the company for the conduct of its business. All these facts will be evaluated by the trial Court on the basis of evidence on record. The petitioner has not come up with any explanation as to what prevented him from filing the revision against the order dated 06.10.2012 vide which he was summoned to face the trial and against the order vide which he was served with notice of accusation. He preferred this petition at a very belated stage when the evidence had already been concluded by the complainant. Keeping all the above facts and circumstances in view, this petition has no merits and is dismissed. It is, however, made clear that nothing contained in this order shall have any bearing on the merits of the complaint or shall be taken as expression of opinion of this Court on any issue to be dealt with and decided by the trial Court.
|