2021 Supreme(SC) 612

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
AJAY RASTOGI, ABHAY S. OKA, JJ.
Ashutosh Ashok Parasrampuriya and Another – Appellants
Versus
M/s. Gharrkul Industries Pvt. Ltd. and Others – Respondents
Criminal Appeal Nos. 1206, 1207 of 2021, SLP (Criminal) Nos. 7573, 9520 of 2014
Decided On : 08-10-2021

IMPORTANT POINT
Dishonour of cheque – Offence by company – It may not be proper to split while reading complaint so as to come to a conclusion that allegations as a whole are not sufficient to fulfil requirement of Section 141 of NI Act.

Headnote:

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – Sections 138 and 141 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 – Dishonour of cheque – Offence by company – What is to be looked into is whether in complaint, in addition to asserting that appellants are Directors of Company and they are incharge of and responsible to Company for conduct of business of Company and if statutory compliance of Section 141 of NI Act has been made, it may not be open for High Court to interfere under Section 482 Cr.P.C. unless it comes across some unimpeachable, incontrovertible evidence which is beyond suspicion or doubt or totally acceptable circumstances which may clearly indicate that Director could not have been concerned with issuance of cheques and asking him to stand trial would be abuse of process of Court – Despite presence of basic averment, it may come to a conclusion that no case is made out against particular Director for which there could be various reasons – In case on hand, allegations in complaint are that at the time at which cheques were issued by Company and dishonoured by Bank, appellants were Directors of Company and were responsible for its business and all appellants were involved in business of Company and were responsible for all affairs of Company – It may not be proper to split while reading complaint so as to come to a conclusion that allegations as a whole are not sufficient to fulfil requirement of Section 141 of NI Act – Complaint specifically refers to point of time when cheques were issued, their presentment, dishonour and failure to pay in spite of notice of dishonour – No error has been committed by High Court in dismissing petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. under impugned judgment – High Court has rightly not interfered in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of complaint – Appeal dismissed. (Paras 23, 27, 28, 30 and 32)

Facts of the case:

Present appeals are directed against the common judgment and order dated 18th July, 2014 filed at the instance of appellants under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the order dated 10th November, 2012 pursuant to which they were summoned to answer to a charge of Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 that came to be dismissed by the High Court under the order impugned.

Findings of Court:

So far as Directors who are not signatories to the cheques or who are not Managing Directors or Joint Managing Directors are concerned, it is clear from conclusions drawn in the aforestated judgment that it is necessary to aver in the complaint filed under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the NI Act that at the relevant time when the offence was committed, the Directors were in charge of and were responsible for conduct of the business of the company.

Result : Appeals dismissed.