R. BALASUBRAMANIAM, J.

For the The petitioner is the complainant in C.C. No. 3063 of 1997, on the file of the IXth Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Madras. The respondent as described before this court is the accused in that case. That was a private complaint filed alleging an offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. In that calendar case, after the issue of process, the accused filed M.P. No. 1444 of 1988 to discharge him from the offence. That petition was opposed and yet the learned trial Magistrate allowed that petition by order dated June 10, 1998, resulting in the accused being discharged from the offence in that calendar case. It is the correctness of that order that is being questioned in this revision before this court.

In this order the parties to the revision would here in after be referred to as the complainant and the accused for convenience sake.

Though more than one ground was raised before the lower court on behalf of the accused to discharge him from the offence, yet the request for discharge was sustained only on the ground that since the company had not been impleaded as an accused, the prosecution against the present accused alone