Pradeep Nandrajog, J.—The question which falls for consideration in the present petition is: when the proceedings under section 138 of the N.I. Act against a company is dropped, can it continue against the directors of that company.

2. All the above captioned 5 petitions have been filed by the Rajeev Gupta a director of the company M/s. Sakura Seimitsu India Ltd.

3. Vide above captioned 5 petitions under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, a challenge is laid to the common order dated 18.7.2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge whereby revision petitions filed by the petitioner against the order dated 18.1.2005 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate refusing to drop proceedings under section 138 of the N.I. Act against the petitioner were dismissed.

4. Briefly noted-relevant facts are that the respondent No. 2, M/s. Fortis Financial Ltd. filed 5 complaints under section 138 of the NI Act against the company M/s. Sakura Seimitsu India Ltd. In the said complaints, petitioner was impleaded as a co-accused on the ground that he is the director of the accused company and in-charge and responsible for the conduct of the business of the accused c