TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (9) TMI 898
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al. Learned APP waives service on behalf of Respondent No.1 - State and learned counsel Mr. Ashish Sharma, waives notice on behalf of respondent No.2. 3. By this petition preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner seeks quashing of criminal proceedings being C.C. No.82/SS/2016, pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 72nd Court, Vikhroli, Mumbai, initiated against him by the respondent No.2- original complainant. 4. Mr. Gheewala, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the petitioner having resigned as a Director (independent and non-executive) from the accused Company - 'Kanchan International Ltd and Kanchan International Lim....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....petitioner) in the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 43rd Court, Borivali, Mumbai, being C.C. No.3309/SS/2014 (subsequently transferred to the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 72nd Court, Vikhroli, Mumbai and renumbered as C.C. No.82/SS/2016), for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 138 r/w 141 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The respondent No.2 has averred in para 2 of the said complaint that accused Nos.3 to 11 (the petitioner is original accused No.11) are the Directors of the accused Nos.1 and 2 Company and as such are liable and responsible for the day to day affairs, business and transactions of the said Company. Pursuant to the said complaint, the learned Magistrate vide order dated 16th October....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uash the complaint because of the absence of more particulars about role of the Director in the complaint. It may do so having come across some unimpeachable, uncontrovertible evidence which is beyond suspicion or doubt or totally acceptable circumstances which may clearly indicate that the Director could not have been concerned with the issuance of cheques and asking him to stand the trial would be abuse of the process of the court. Despite the presence of basic averment, it may come to a conclusion that no case is made out against the Director. Take for instance a case of a Director suffering from a terminal illness who was bedridden at the relevant time or a Director who had resigned long before issuance of cheques. In such cases, if t....