9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 1517X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ning order dated 19.09.2019 made by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate in C.C. No. 17370/2018 under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ('NI Act' for short). 2. Mr. Sandeep Mahapatra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits, that though the petitioner was one of the signatories to the cheques that are the subject matter of the criminal complaint, at the time when these were signed and issued, the cheques were post post-dated for 30.07.2018 and 30.08.3018, and had been issued on behalf of M/s. Ortel Communication Ltd./respondent No.2, where the petitioner was employed as Chief Technology Officer, at the time of signing of the cheques. Counsel submits however that the petitioner retired from employment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r vide order dated 19.09.2019; and the learned Metropolitan Magistrate has proceeded to summon the petitioner only for the reason that he was one of the authorized signatories who co-signed the cheques. 8. Upon a prima-facie conspectus of the averments contained in the petition and the submissions made; and upon a perusal of the documents annexed with the petition, issue notice. 9. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 accepts notice; and seeks time to file reply. 10. Upon the petitioner taking requisite steps let notice be sent to all other respondents, by all permissible modes, returnable for the next date. 11. Let reply to the petition be filed within 06 weeks of service; rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed within 04 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsible for the business and affairs of the company and for honouring the cheque on the date that the cheque was returned unpaid. 14. In the present case, it is clear that though the petitioner co-signed the cheques in question, he had retired from the company more than 09 months before the cheques came to be presented; and could not therefore have ensured sufficient funds in the bank account of the company to honour the cheques, even if he had so desired. 15. On a first blush therefore, the deeming provision contained in section 141 NI Act would not apply to the petitioner, since he was no longer in charge of the affairs of the respondent company on the date that the offence defined in section 138 was committed. 16. In view of the above ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
