TMI Blog2000 (9) TMI 1069X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sakhapatnam in so far as the petitioner is concerned, who appears as accused No. 5 facing a charge for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Kodandaram contends that there are no specific allegations against the petitioner-accused No. 5 to implicate him in the alleged offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It is stated that accused No. 5 has nothing to do with the affairs of the company. 5. On the other hand, learned senior counsel for respondent No. 2 Sri E. Manohar contends that according to the complainant there is a specific allegation that the cheque issued on behalf of accused No. 1 company had been dishonoured and accused No. 5 is th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed bottle and its contents. Thus, there was no allegation or material that the appellant had anything to do with the manufacture of the bottle or beverage or that the appellant held the licence for manufacture of such beverage. It is in the background of these facts that the court held that in respect of adulteration of a drink detected in a remote corner, 100 kilometres away from the office of the appellant, it cannot be fastened with criminal liability and the cognizance taken by the learned magistrate against the said accused company was quashed. 8. In that case, the Supreme Court as stated in para. 28 of the judgment observed that the order of the magistrate summoning the accused must reflect that he has applied his mind to the facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... charge of and responsible to the affairs of the company. Thus, in this case, it cannot be said that the petitioner accused had absolutely no connection with the company that is said to have committed the offence. 12. In the case of Secunderabad Health Care Ltd. v. Secunderabad Hospitals P. Ltd. [1999] 96 Comp Cas 106 (AP); [1998] (2) ALD (CrI.) 206 (AP), his Lordship Sri Justice B. Sudershan Reddy of this court had occasion to consider this question. The following observations, in para. No. 9, appearing in the said judgment are relevant (page 112) : There must be specific accusation against each of the persons impleaded that such person was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business of the company at the relevant t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e and the law applicable thereto. He has to examine the nature of allegations made in the complaint and the evidence both oral and documentary in support thereof and would that be sufficient for the complainant to succeed in bringing charge home to the accused. It is not that the magistrate is a silent spectator at the time of recording of preliminary evidence before summoning of the accused. Magistrate has to carefully scrutinise the evidence brought on record and may even himself put questions to the complainant and his witnesses to elicit answers to find out the truthfulness of the allegations or otherwise and then examine if any offence is prima facie committed by all or any of the accused. 16. This has assumed all the more signifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
