The petitioner herein is the sole accused in S.T.No.2880/2015 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kanjirappally, for offence under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, instituted on the basis of the complaint filed by the 2nd respondent herein. Anx.1 is the certified copy of the impugned complaint, which led to the institution of the aforestated S.T.No.2880/2015. The complaint was filed by the 2nd respondent alleging that he had advanced an amount of Rs.9 lakhs to the petitioner with the understanding that the interest chargeable on the said amount will be @ 12% p.a. That the petitioner had agreed to repay the principal amount on 15.6.2015 and the interest on the last date of every English calendar month. That in pursuance of the said loan transaction, the petitioner had issued Anx.II cheque dated 15.6.2015 for amount of Rs. 9 lakhs in favour of the 2nd respondent and the cheque, on presentation by the complainant, has resulted in dishonour for want of sufficient funds. After complying with the statutory formalities, Anx.I complaint was filed before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-I, Kanjirappally, which was taken on file as aforestated S.T.No. 2880/2015. The petitioner asserts that the allegations in Anx.I complainant are incorrect. Further it is stated that the petitioner is a business man, who was conducting the petroleum outlet of M/s.Bharat Petroleum Corporation, in the name, "Mathew Anthraper & Co." in the year 2010 to 2013 and that this is a registered firm. Further that the petitioner had stopped the said business in the year 2013 and the petitioner had no connection with the said firm thereafter. It is further asserted that the cheque, which was presented by the complainant, was issued from the account of the said firm. The account was inoperative from 2013. The complainant has not made the firm a party and he has made only the petitioner as the sole accused. Further the case projected by the petitioner is that Anx.III, which is stated to be statement issued by the bank concerned, would indicate that the account is maintained by the firm and that the petitioner is unnecessarily dragged in the malicious prosecution launched by the 2nd respondent. It is contended that even if the prosecution is allowed to proceed, it would not serve any purpose and it will not end in a successful prosecution. The prime basis of this contention is that since the dishonoured cheque in question has been issued from the account maintained by the partnership firm, the drawer of the cheque is primarily the partnership firm and, therefore, the aspects arising out of Sec.141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act will come into play and that therefore the principal accused/offender in such a case is only the partnership firm and that without impleading the partnership firm, which is the principal offender, the prosecution is bound to fail, in the light of the legal position laid down by the Apex Court in relation to matters arising out of Sec.141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, etc. The petitioner places reliance on the celebrated judgment of the Apex Court in the case Aneeta Hada v. Godfather Travels & Tours Pvt. Ltd. reported in (2015) 5 SCC 661, to canvass the abovesaid position. In the light of these aspects, the petitioner has filed the instant Criminal Miscellaneous Case by taking recourse to the extra ordinary powers conferred on this Court under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C., with the following prayers;

"....... to quash all further proceedings against the petitioner in S.T.No.2880/2015 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-I, Kanjirappally, as it is an abuse of process of court."

2. Sri.S.Rajeev, learned counsel appearing petitioner accused has made submissions in the light of the contentions and grounds urged in the Crl.M.C.

3. After service of notice, the 2nd respondent has entered appearance through his learned counsel, Sri.C.Harindra Mohan Nair. Sri.C.Harindra Mohan Nair, learned