( 1 ) THIS petition is filed under section 482 Cr. P. C. to quash the proceedings in C. C. No. 196/97 on the file of XV Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.

( 2 ) THE facts in brief, are as under : The 2nd respondent (hereinafter called as respondent) filed a private complaint against the petitioners herein alleging offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable instruments Act (hereinafter called as Act ). The 1st petitioner is an Incorporated Public ltd. Company under the provisions of the companies Act. The 2nd petitioner is the chairman and Managing Director and the petitioners 3, 4 and 5 and another Bharath kumar Modi are the Directors of the 1st accused-company. The respondent is also a Public Limited Company. In the month of January, 1995 an agreement under the caption "equipments Lease Agreement" was entered into between the respondent and the 1st petitioner herein. The respondent purchased various plant and machinery for the expansion of the activities of the 1st petitioner-Company by investing a sum of Rs. 1 1/2 crores and leased out the same under "equipments Lease agreement" On a monthly rental of 3,78, 350-00 payable by 17th of every month. Under the said agreement, the 1st petitioner issued post-dated cheques in favour of the respondents for payment of monthly rentals. The said cheques were issued on the account of the 1st petitioner in State Bank of Hyderabad at Indore Branch. Towards the monthly rentals falling due for december, 1996 and January, 1997, the 1st petitioner issued the cheques bearing nos. 0127314, dated : 1-12-1996 and 0127315, dated: 1-1-1997, both drawn on state Bank of Hyderabad, Indore Branch. The respondent-complainant presented those cheques for realisation through their bankers Bank of Baroda, Khairtabad branch, Hyderabad. But, both the cheques were dishonoured for the reason of "insufficient funds" After issuing a statutory notice under Section 138 of the Act, the respondent filed the complaint against the petitioners herein for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act. On the basis of the complaint and after examining the complainant, the learned Magistrate had taken cognizance of the offence and registered the complaint as C. C. No. 196/ 97. The petitioners have come up with this application to quash the said proceedings.

( 3 ) THE learned counsel for the petitioners raised the following contentions:1. The post-dated cheques were issued on State Bank of Hyderabad, Indore branch merely as security and the mutually agreed procedure relating to the payment of installments by the petitioners-company to the respondent-complainant is that the cheque was being issued on 15th every month drawn on State bank of Hyderabad, Nariman point, Bombay branch where sufficient arrangements were made for honouring the cheques and the cheques being realised, the complainant used to return the cheques drawn on State Bank of hyderabad, Indore Branch and the respondent failed to follow the said procedure while presenting the postdated cheques at State Bank of hyderabad, Indore Branch. 2. On behalf of the petitioners Company,the letter dated: 11-12-1996 and legal notice, dated: 21-12-1996 were sent to the complaint intimating that the post-dated cheques have been cancelled and called upon the complainant to return them and also issued instructions to the concerned bank not to honour the same and in spite of the said notice and the letter, intimating cancellation of both the cheques, the respondent-complainant resented the same and as such, the provisions under Section 138 of the act are not applicable and no offence muchless under Section-138 of the Act was made out against these petitioners. 3. The averments in the complaint make out a civil dispute between the parties and as such, criminal proceedings against these petitioners are not maintainable.

( 4 ) ON the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent refuted these contentions and contended that the petitioners are liable for offence under Sec

Click Here to Read the rest of this document