2004 (5) TMI 603

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1992 (1) KLT 1. 2. The prosecutions are under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Admittedly, the respondents/accused 3 to 5 are not signatories in the cheque. There is no contention that they are the managing partners of the firm on behalf of which the co-accused/managing partner had issued the cheque. There was of course a vague and sweeping assertion in the complaint filed that th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f a firm. The whole array of partners are forced to face indictment by simply showing them also as accused persons in their capacity as partners of the firm. It is the duty of the Magistrates taking cognizance to alertly apply their mind and come to the conclusion whether sufficient circumstances are there to persuade them to entertain the threshold satisfaction. Materials must be insisted to sati .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... accused 3 to 5 (respondents herein) do not deserve to be proceeded against is eminently correct. In that view of the matter, notwithstanding the reception of Exts.P1 and P2 at an inappropriate stage, I am satisfied that the impugned orders do not warrant any interference. The challenge raised in these revisions in these circumstances must fail. 5. In the result there revision petitions are dis .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X