Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2021 (9) TMI 93

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... holder in due course of the cheque and, such complaint is made within one month of the date on which the cause of action arise. Proviso to section 142(1)(b) states that the cognizance of complaint may be taken by the Court after the prescribed period, if the complainant satisfies the Court that he has sufficient cause for not making a complaint within such period. There is no substance in the contention that he was not aware that cheque is issued by Mukta Developers. Thus, explanation offered for not joining accused Mukta Developers or other signatory as accused is false. There is no justification whatsoever. On the face of the cheque itself it is clear that it was drawn in favour of Mukta Developers. In view of facts and circumstance .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ners. It was his further contention that in the course of the trial of the present case, it appears from the evidence that Mukta Developers is a partnership firm. The learned JMFC dismissed the said application as, though cheque was signed by both the partners representing Mukta Developers, at this stage their addition is of no use as there was no legal notice issued to the firm. He also moved an application for amendment of complaint proposing to add that he was not aware about the partnership firm and during the trial only he came to know. Accused Santosh Faldessai and Nandkishor Kanekar were incharge and responsible for business of said firm. The said application also came to be dismissed holding that complainant was aware about the said .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... w it For Mukta Developers Authorised Signatory and there are two signatures on the same. 7. The learned Counsel for the applicant relied on Amol Shripal Sheth V/s. Hari Om Trading Co. and Ors., 2014 (6) MhLJ 222, wherein it is observed that the power under section 319 of CrPC is part of normal process in the administration of justice. The power under section 319 is discretionary in nature. The observations of the Apex Court and this provision of CrPC again show that the Magistrate takes cognizance of the offence and not of the offender. It is further held at para 18 of the said judgment as under : 18. The complainant being stranger to the company, may not have the knowledge about the management or affairs of the company. Secti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd signatories are authorised to sign on behalf of the Mukta Developers. No notice was issued to the Mukta Developers nor it is made party in the complaint. 9. Learned Counsel Shri Bhobe relied on N. Hariharan Krishnan V/s. J. Thomas (2018) 13 SCC 663. The complainant therein filed application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. with a prayer to implead M/s. Dakshin Granites as accused A1 in criminal proceedings. His contention is that it came to the notice of the respondent during the course of cross-examination of the appellant herein at the trial. The said application was contested. However, the learned JMFC allowed the said application. The revision against that order is also dismissed. Therefore, criminal appeal came to be filed. The H .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt clause and mandates that no Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under Section 138 except upon a complaint, in writing, made by the payee or, as the case may be, the holder in due course of the cheque and, such complaint is made within one month of the date on which the cause of action arise. Proviso to section 142(1)(b) states that the cognizance of complaint may be taken by the Court after the prescribed period, if the complainant satisfies the Court that he has sufficient cause for not making a complaint within such period. 11. The application under Section 319 of CrPC by which Mukta Developers is sought to be impleaded is in fact the complaint against Mukta Developers, which is filed nearly after 2 half years af .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates