Anand Byrareddy, J.—These petitions are heard and disposed of together as identical facts and circumstances are involved and are in relation to transactions between the same parties.

2. Heard the learned Senior Advocate Sri G.L. Rawal appearing for the Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent.

3. In Criminal Petition No. 4104 of 2009, the petitioners 1 to 3 are a company and its Directors, respectively, arraigned as accused in a criminal case filed by the respondent

M/s. STCL Limited, a Government of India undertaking, before the Court of XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, in case CC No. 16289 of 2009, alleging an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

Petitioner 1 had entered into a contract dated 9.7.2008 with the respondent for import purchase of 750 MT of MS Turnings and Borings for a value of Rs. 1,61,26,000. In terms of the contract the petitioner was to furnish a “PDC” (sic) or a post-dated cheque equivalent to 100% of the contract value as security for due payment and that the same would be returned on satisfactory performance of the contract. It was also required of pet