Andhra Pradesh High Court
V.K.VORA - Appellant
Versus
K.K.AHUJA - RESPONDENT
Decided On: 10-10-02
Negotiable Instrument Act - Quashing of Proceedings - Section 138 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Section 138, Section 141 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 138 and Section 141 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, emphasizing the need for specific allegations in the complaint regarding the role played by the accused in the transaction. The court referred to previous cases to highlight the requirement for clear and unambiguous allegations and the definition of 'person in charge' in the context of the Act. The interpretation of these provisions influenced the court's decision to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The complainant filed two complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act against the company and its office bearers, including the petitioner, for dishonoring cheques. The petitioner sought quashing of the proceedings, arguing that the complaints lacked specific allegations regarding his role in the company's dealings with the complainant.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the complaints did not specify the petitioner's role in the company's dealings and that the summoning orders were based on insufficient details. The court emphasized the need for clear and unambiguous allegations as per the provisions of the Act.
Issues: The issues revolved around the sufficiency of allegations in the complaints regarding the petitioner's role in the company's dealings and the validity of the summoning orders under Section 138 of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the complaints lacked specific allegations regarding the petitioner's role, emphasizing the requirement for clear and unambiguous allegations as per the provisions of the Act. The court also highlighted the definition of 'person in charge' in previous cases to support its decision.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petitions and set aside the summoning order, quashing the proceedings against the petitioner under Section 138 of the Act.
( 1 ) THROUGH these petitions under Section 482, Cr. P. C. the petitioner seeks quashing of proceedings arising out of complaint cases No. 58 and 59 of 2001 filed by the complainant/respondent No. 1 under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument act (hereinafter referred to the Act) pending in the court of Shri Rajinder Kumar, M. M. Delhi.
( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated the facts leading to these petitions are that on 14th May, 2001 respondent No. 1. K. K. Ahuja filed two complaints against the company M/s. Motorol Speciality Oils Limited and its office bearers. Complaint No. 58/2001 was regarding dishonouring of five cheques of Rs. 5 lacs each all dated 28th February 2001 whereas the other complaint No. 59/2001 was regarding dishonouring of three cheques for an amount of Rs. 3 lacs dated 31st October, 2000 Rs. 3 lacs dated 30th November and Rs. 10 lacs dated 20th December, 2000 respectively. As per allegations made in the aforesaid complaints, complainant K. K. Ahuja is carrying the business of supplying oils and lubricants and is the sole proprietor of M/s. Delhi Paints and Oil Traders. Against the said goods supplied by the complainant to the company M/s. Motorol Speciality Oils Limited, company had issued cheques. On presentation, these cheques were dishonoured. Petitioner was working as deputy General Manager in the said company. In both the complaints, said company was cited as accused No. 1 whereas petitioner was cited as accused No. 9. Regarding the role played by the petitioner in the company s dealings with the complainant, the only averment contained in the para No. 2 of the complaints was as follows:- para No. 2 :
"the accused No. 1 is a limited company having its office at the address mentioned in the cause title. The accused Nos. 2 to 6 are the Director of the Accused No. 1, accused Nos. 7, 8 and 9 are the Vice President (Finance), General Manager and Deputy Manager of the accused No. 1 who are directly and actively involved in the financial dealings of the accused company with accused Nos. 2 to 9. Hence all the accused are liable for action under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the negotiable Instrument Act. "
( 3 ) IN preliminary evidence, complainant K. K. Ahuja examined himself as CW- 1. He made an identical statement in both the complaint cases to the effect that accused Nos. 2 to 6 are the Directors of the company and accused Nos. 7 to 9 are the Vice President (Finance), General Manager and Deputy General Manager respectively and they were responsible for the conduct of day to day business of the company at the time of commission of offence. On this basis, learned MM passed identical orders dated 3rd October, 2001 summoning the accused persons including the petitioner to face the trial under Section 138 of the Act.
( 4 ) FEELING aggrieved, petitioner has preferred these petitions under Section 482, Cr. P. C. for quashing the proceedings under Section 138 of the Act.
( 5 ) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
( 6 ) CONTENTION of learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is no averment in the complaint or in the statement of respondent No. 1/complainant specifying the role played by the petitioner in the company s dealings with the complainant. Simply saying that petitioner is directly and actively involved in the financial dealings of the accused company or they were responsible for the conduct of day to day business of the company is not enough. Section 141 of the Act which deals with offences by the company, reads as under :- section 141 Offences by companies
(1) If, the person committing an offence under Section 138 is a company, every person (who, at the time the offence was committed, was in charge of, and was responsible to, the company to the conduct of the business of the company, as well as of the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against the punished accordingly:
PROVIDED that nothing contained in thi
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.