ORDER :

1. Heard Mr. R. Baskar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. N. Umapathi, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. Since common arguments were advanced with respect to both the petitions, a common order is passed.

3. In both the petitions, parties are also the same and they are also agitating more or less on the same issue.

4. Two complaints came to be filed by the respondent in both the petitions, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act read with 200 Cr.P.C. before the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 1, at Tiruppur.

5. The complaint given with respect to Crl. O.P. No. 27705/2015 had originally been taken cognizance as C.C. No. 306/2015 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level at Tiruppur. I am also informed that it had been subsequently transferred to the learned Judicial Magistrate at Avinashi and registered as C.C. No. 29/2017.

6. The complaint with respect to Crl. O.P. No. 27966/2015 had originally been taken cognizance as C.C. No. 304/2015 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level at Tiruppur and subsequently, had been transferred to the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Avinashi, and renumbered as C.C. No. 28/2017.

7. The respondent in both the cases/complainant is Sri. Balaji Yarns, represented by its Partners. They had, transactions with A1, viz. SRS Knitting at Tiruppur, which is a Partnership Firm. The partners had been shown as A2 and A3. They are spouses.

8. In view of the business transactions, two cheques had been issued towards an existing liability. Both the cheques were dated 08.12.2008. The first cheque bore No. 640583 and the second cheque bore No. 090309. They were both drawn on the South Indian Bank Limited, Main Branch, Tiruppur. The first cheque was for a sum of Rs. 2,62,850/- and the second cheque was for a sum of Rs. 3,73,200/-.

9. Crl. O.P. No. 27705/2015 is with respect to cheque amount Rs. 2,62,850/- and Crl. O.P. No. 27966/2015 is with respect to cheque amount Rs. 3,73,200/-. Both the cheques when presented for payment, returned dishonoured. In view of that particular fact, after issuing notice and after going through required procedural process, the defacto complainant had given two separate complaints, originally before the learned Judicial Magistrate/Fast Track Court at Magisterial Level, Tiruppur and which Court had taken cognizance of both the complaints as aforesaid, as C.C. Nos. 306/2015 and 304/2015. On transfer, they are now pending on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Avinashi.

10. Mr. R. Baskar, learned counsel for the petitioner raised one issue, viz. that the petitioner herein/A3 who is also incidentally a partner of A1/Firm, had not signed the cheques. It is also pointed out that except for the allegation, she was responsible for all transactions and also for the day-to-day activities of A1/Firm, it is specifically pointed out that the only further statement made in the complaints is that the cheques were signed by A2/her husband in her presence.

11. The said averments have been interpreted in two different ways by both the learned counsels.

12. Mr. R. Baskar, learned counsel for the petitioner insists that the said averments are not sufficient to attract the offence u/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

13. On the other hand, Mr. N. Umapathi, learned counsel for the respondent insists that the said averments are more than sufficient to array the present petitioner herein as an accused and that she should necessarily have to face the prosecution. It is also alleged by the learned counsel for the respondent that these are issues to be examined during the course of trial and that, on a prima facie reading of the complaints, this Court can never come to any conclusion whether she was directly involved or whether she was not directly involved either with the day-to-day affairs of the Partnership Firm or on the fact that the cheques have been allegedly signed in her presence. It is stated that these ar