(1.) THE revisional application under Section 401/482 of the Code of Criminal procedure is Instituted challenging the order dated 5th May, 2007 passed by learned Chief Judge, City Sessions Court, Kolkata in Criminal Revision Case no. 162 of 2006.

(2.) THE petitioner filed the revisional application before the learned court below, challenging the legality and validity of the order dated 27. 6. 2006 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 3rd Court, Kolkata whereby and whereunder the petitioners prayer to discharge him in connection with. Complaint Case No. C/633/1999 under Section 138/141 Negotiable Instruments act, was rejected.

(3.) CERTIFIED copy of the order passed by the learned Revisional Court in connection with Criminal Revision No. 162 of 2006 will show that before the learned Magistrate, petitioner herein, filed an application praying for an order of discharge on the ground that he resigned from the Company, which is impleaded as accused in connection with the Complaint Case on 4. 10. 1996, long before the cause of action for the complaint case arose and as such the proceeding against him is not legally maintainable in connection with the complaint case. Before the learned Revisional Court, the decision of the supreme Court in K. M. Mathews Case reported in 1992 Cr LJ 3779 was cited. But the learned Court below on consideration of the latter decision of supreme Court in Adalat Prasad Case reported in 2004 C Cr LR (SC) 1001 rejected the said contention of the petitioner.

(4.) IN the application under Section 401 read with 482 of the Code of criminal Procedure, it is the contention of the petitioner that the learned Court below committed illegality and Failed to consider that the complaint case instituted against the petitioner among others is ex facie, devoid of any legality and further continuation of the proceeding will be nothing but an abuse of the process of Court, It is the contention of the petitioner that he is arrayed as accused No. 4 in connection with the Complaint Case No. 635/1999, now pending before the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, in his capacity as Director, M/s Mcca Quilts limited. In the petition of complaint, the Company, being M/s. Meca Quilts Limited is arrayed as accused along with five others including the petitioner.

(5.) IN the petition of complaint, the allegation against the accused persons appears to be that a cheque bearing No. 027563 dated 7. 1. 1999 for a sum of Rs. 50 lakhs was issued to discharge the debt and liability. The said cheque was presented on 7. 1. 1999 before the bank but the said cheque was dishonoured / returned unpaid with the endorsement of the banker, "account closed. "

(6.) IN the petition filed before this Court as well as before the learned court below, the categorical stand of the petitioner is that, long before the said transaction which is the subject matter of the complaint Case was entered Into between the parties, the petitioner resigned from his post from the Board of directors with effect from 4. 10. 1996. Along with the application filed before this court, petitioner produced a xerox copy of Form No. 32 (Annexure P-4)showing that he resigned as Directors of the said company with effect from 4. 10. 1996.

(7.) DURING the course of hearing, learned Advocate for the petitioner also produced original copy of Form No. 32, which is required to be submitted in terms of provision under Section 303 (2) of the Companies Act, 1956.

(8.) LEARNED Advocate for the petitioner which is usual fairness submitted before this Court that so far as the Form No. 32 and the question of quashing a proceeding solely on the basis of the recital In Form No. 32, there are conflicting and divergent decisions of this Court.

(9.) LEARNED Advocate for the petitioner submitted that as per the latest decision of this Court, the recital in Form No. 32 has been accepted to bo a ground to quash the proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable instruments Art