ORAL JUDGMENT :- Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties.

2. By this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the applicants seek to quash Summary Criminal Case No. 72/2005 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Achalpur.

3. Non-applicant No.1 (hereinafter referred to as the "Complainant") is a company duly registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956. It is engaged the business of construction. Its registered office is at Achalpur Camp, District- Amravati.

4. Applicant No. 1 is a partnership firm which is also engaged in the business of construction. It has its office at Nagpur. Applicant Nos. 2 to 4 are the partners of applicant No.1.

5. The complainant filed a complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the applicants alleging therein that the complaint provided plant and machinery on rental basis to the applicants. Towards the payment of rental amount, applicant No.2 (Girish s/o Dharampal Jain) on behalf of all the applicants, issued cheque for Rs. 3 Lacs on 25-10-2004 in favour of the complainant drawn on State of Bank of India, Industrial Finance Branch, Nagpur. The cheque was issued towards the amount due and payable by all the applicants to the complainant and in discharge of their pre-existing debt and liabilities. As per the instructions of the applicants the said cheque was represented by the complainant with its Bank for encashment on 26-2-2005. However, the said cheque was returned dishonoured by the bankers with the remarks "Payment stopped by Drawer" and an intimation to that effect was received by the complainant on 2-3-2005. The complainant issued notice to the applicants 5-3-2005 demanding the amount. The said notice was received by the applicants on 10-3-2005. Despite receipt of the notice the applicants did not make payment within 15 days. Hence the complainant filed complaint in April, 2. After verification the learned Magistrate directed issuance of process und section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against all the applicants by order dated 16-5-2005.

6. On 25-10-2005 the applicants moved an application for dismissal of the complaint. However, by order dated 16-11-2005 the said application was dismissed by the learned Magistrate on the ground that dismissal of the complaint would amount to review of his own order which is not permissible. Thereafter the applicants preferred Criminal Revision Application No. 15512005 and by order dated 28-2-2006 the Additional Sessions Judge, Achalpur dismissed revision application. The applicants have challenged the dismissal of the revision application and have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

7. The applicants have challenged the proceedings mainly on the ground that the complainant has not stated about the role played by the applicants in the alleged transaction, In fact, no role has been attributed to any of the applicants in the said complaint. In the absence of such averment either in the complaint or in the verification, no offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is made out and the proceedings initiated against the applicants are liable to be squashed and set aside.

8. I have heard Mr. Shyam Dewani, Advocate for the applicants and Mr. Nitin Sambre, Advocate for non-applicant No. 1/original complainant.

9. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that under section 141 f the Negotiable Instruments Act, if the person committing an offence under section 138 is a company (which includes a firm), every person who, at the time e offence was committed, was in charge of, and was responsible to the company/firm for the conduct of the business of the company/firm, as well as the company/firm, shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence. The learned counsel or the applicants submitted that in order to attract the provisions of section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document