Arijit Pasayat, J.—Leave granted.

2. In all these appeals the appellants have questioned correctness of the judgment rendered by a Single Judge of the Gujarat High Court refusing to accept the prayer by the appellants to quash the proceedings initiated on the basis of a complaint filed by the respondents alleging commission of offence in terms of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short the ‘Act’) and other connected offences.

3. The facts as projected by the respondents in the complaint were to the effect that the respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘complainant’) supplied goods on credit to M/s Garware Nylons Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Company’) (accused No.14). Cheques issued by the company were not honoured by the drawee bank on the ground of insufficient funds. Payments were not made even after legal notices. There were 14 accused persons including the company named in the complaint. Some of the accused persons were Directors and while others were employees. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara after recording statement of marketing manager who had filed the complaint for himself and on behalf of the complainant-company,