TMI Blog2001 (1) TMI 855X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat an order of quashing of criminal proceeding, which is otherwise unsustainable in law, could be sustained because of the deposit of money in this court. In this view of the matter, the so-called deposit of money by the respondent in this court is of no consequence. - CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 10 TO 12 OF 2001 - - - Dated:- 4-1-2001 - G.B. PATTANAIK AND U.C. BANERJEE, JJ. D.A. Dave, Gourab Banerjee, R.N. Karanjawala, Arunabh Choudhary, Mrs. Manik Karanjawala for the Appellant. G.L. Sanghi, R.K. Sanghi, N.M. Sharma and Rajesh Prasad Singh for the Respondent. JUDGMENT Pattanaik, J. - Leave granted. 2. The complainant is the appellant against the impugned orders dated 13-8-1999, of a learned single judge of the Himachal Pradesh High Court in three criminal miscellaneous petitions filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. By the impugned orders, the learned judge quashed the three criminal complaints filed under section 138 read with section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Admittedly, three cheques had been given to the appellant, drawn on Bank of Baroda, Parliament Steet, New Delhi, representing different amounts, amoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8, criminal proceedings cannot be proceeded with. The High Court rejected the first contention and held that the criminal prosecution would lie under section 138 without impleading the company of which the accused is the director as the party. But so far as the second contention is concerned, the High Court came to the conclusion that the notice that was issued by the complainant on account of dishonour of the cheques having been issued to the accused in his individual capacity and not having been issued to the drawer thereof, no offence can be said to have been committed by the company Bhalla Techtran Industries Ltd., and, therefore, the criminal proceedings cannot be proceeded against by taking recourse to section 141. It is this conclusion of the High Court, which is the subject-matter of challenge in these appeals. 3. It may be stated at this stage that in the earlier round of litigation, when the accused has filed application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it had been urged that the service of notice, as contemplated under proviso ( b ) to section 138 of the Act, has not been proved, but yet the court refused to exercise jurisdiction under section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he conclusion that there has been no service of notice to the drawer, which is the sine qua non for completion of offence under section 138 read with section 141 of the Act, and, therefore, the conclusion of the High Court is unassailable. Mr. Sanghi further urged that the conclusion of the High Court to the effect that supply of watches made by the respondent to the company Bhalla Techtran Industries Ltd. and cheques involved in the case were also issued by the said company through its director that is the petitioner and in view of such admitted facts, the petitioner cannot be proceeded against for the offence under section 138 in his individual capacity, is the only conclusion permissible under the facts and circumstances of the case and, therefore, the order quashing the criminal proceedings should not be interfered with. Accord ing to Mr. Sanghi, the complainant has been prosecuting the accused Amit Bhalla in his individual capacity, though categorically in the complaint petition, it has been stated that the cheques had been issued by Bhalla Techtran Industries Ltd. through Mr. Amit J. Bhalla as a director and consequently, so far as the company is concerned, who is the real ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ries Ltd., through its director Shri Amit Bhalla. The appellant had issued notice to said Shri Amit J. Bhalla, director of Bhalla Techtran Industries Ltd. Notwithstanding the service of the notice, the amount in question was not paid. The object of issuing notice indicating the factum of dishonour of the cheques is to give an opportunity to the drawer to make payment within 15 days, so that it will not be necessary for the payee to proceed against him in any criminal action, even though the bank dishonoured the cheques. It is Amit Bhalla, who had signed the cheques as the director of Bhalla Techtran Industries Ltd. When the notice was issued to the said Shri Amit Bhalla, director of Bhalla Techtran Industries Ltd., it was incumbent upon Shri Bhalla to see that the payments are made within the stipulated period of 15 days. It is not disputed that Shri Bhalla has signed the cheques, nor is it disputed that Shri Bhalla was the director of the company. Bearing in mind the object of issuance of such notice, it must be held that the notices cannot be construed in a narrow technical way without examining the substance of the matter. We really fail to understand as to why the judgment of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
