Partners of a firm are jointly and severally liable for cheque dishonor under the Negotiable Instruments Act, irrespective of whether a partner has formally resigned, as long as they were part of the firm during the transaction.

JUDGMENT :

J.C. DOSHI, J.

1. This common order governs the disposal of captioned petitions as both the petitions arise from selfsame private complaint.

2. Criminal Misc. Application No.6202 of 2017 is filed by the petitioner Ritaben – original accused No.2 for quashing and setting aside proceedings of Criminal Case No.3142 of 2014 filed by the private respondent pending before the learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.34, Ahmedabad.

2.1 Criminal Misc. Application No.6517 of 2017 is filed by the petitioner Pareshbhai – original accused No.1 for quashing and setting aside proceedings of Criminal Case No.3183 of 2015 filed by the private respondent pending before the learned CJM, Ahmedabad Rural.

3. Brief facts of the case are as under:-

3.1 Pavan Motors (erstwhile M/s. Yash Car) (in short “partnership firm”) is registered under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932. Petitioners are the partners of the partnership firm. Husband of the complainant is friend of the petitioners and therefore, they have homely relations.

3.2 That between the 2011 and 2013, since the petitioners are in financial crunch, the private respondent had lent Rs.75 lakh to the petitioners.

3.3 Thereafter, for repayment of the same, the partnership firms, wherein the petitioners are partners, issued four different cheques to the tune of Rs.75 lakh in favour of the complainant. When the complainant presented said cheques, it were dishonoured.

3.4 Therefore, private complaints being Criminal Case No. Criminal Case No.3142 of 2014 and Criminal Case No.3183 of 2015 are filed, after completing statutory procedure, process is issued against the petitioners.

3.5 Hence, present petitions for quashment of the complaints.

4. For petitioner Rita Ben, I have heard heard learned advocate Mr. Pravin Gondaliya, for petitioner Pareshbhai, I have heard learned advocate Mr. AR Joshi, learned advocate Mr. Dipan Desai appearing for the private respondent in both the matters and learned APP Soham Joshi for the respondent State is also heard.

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE PETITIONER OF CRMA 6202/2017

5. Learned advocate Mr. Pravin Gondaliya made following submissions:-

5.1 That the petitioner is not the signatory to the cheque. She is not involved in the day-to-day affairs of the partnership firm. The petitioner is nowhere connected with the transaction alleged in the complaint. That the averments made in the complaint indicates that there was financial or monetary transaction took place between the complainant and accused No.1 Pareshbhai. A reference has been made to para 3 of the complaint that accused No.1 Pareshbhai has put his property for security in the regards to financial transaction being a subject matter of the criminal complaints. Lastly, it was submitted that the complainant has not joined the partnership firm as a party accused and therefore, there is clear defiance of section 141 of the NI Act.

5.2 Mainly upon above submissions, learned advocate Mr. Gondaliya requests to allow Criminal Misc. Application No.6202 of 2017 and to quash private complaint against the petitioner.

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE PETITIONER OF CRMA 6517/2017

6. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi made following submissions:-

6.1 That the petitioner has resigned from the partnership firm with effect from 31st March 2014. The complaint in question for dishonour of the cheques is filed subsequent there to. That the complainant since has been retired as a partner from the partnership firm, he cannot be prosecuted for the transaction took place with the partnership firm, whereby he was erstwhile partner.

6.2 That the income tax return for AY 2015-16 shows th