JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 378 of Cr.P.C., to allow the appeal, set aside the order, dated 20.01.2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court Magistrate Level at Thiruvallur in S.T.C.No.06 of 2016 and convict the accused Nos.1 to 8 for the offence under Section 138 r/w 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and grant compensation of twice the amount of cheque to the appellant.)

The Appeal:

The appellant is the complainant in a private complaint filed under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, complaining that the first respondent and the respondent Nos.2 to 8, being its Directors and officers, committed an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

2. The said complaint was taken on file by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court, Magistrate Level at Thiruvallur in S.T.C.No.6 of 2016 and by a judgment, dated 20.01.2017, the Trial Court acquitted all the accused holding that the cheque was not issued in discharge of any legally enforceable debt or liability.

3. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant herein had filed Crl.A.No.25 of 2017 and by a judgment, dated 28.03.2018, the Learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Thiruvallur, upturned the finding of acquittal and convicted all the accused Nos.1 to 9 for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentenced the accused Nos.2 to 9 to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one year and directed all the accused Nos.1 to 9 to pay a compensation of Rs.10,00,00,000/- and in default of payment of the same, directed accused Nos.2 to 9 to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of one month.

4. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the accused Nos.1 to 4 filed Crl.R.C.No.509 of 2018, the accused Nos.5 to 8 filed Crl.R.C.No.511 of 2018 and accused No.9 filed Crl.R.C.No.744 of 2018 and by a common judgment, dated 04.09.2018, this Court confirmed the conviction and sentence as imposed by the learned Appellate Judge.

5. Aggrieved by the same, the respondents preferred S.L.P.(Crl.) No.11021 of 2019 and by an order, dated 09.11.2021, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India found that in view of the full bench decision of this Court in S. Ganapathy Vs. N. Senthilvel, (2016) 4 CTC 119 and subsequently, the full bench judgment in K. Rajalingam Vs. R. Suganthalakshmi, 2020 SCC Online Mad 1052 that the filing of the appeal against acquittal before the learned Sessions Court, Thiruvallur by itself was not maintainable and the appellant herein ought to have filed an appeal against the acquittal before this Court. Therefore, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India disposed off the Special Leave Petition with the liberty to the appellant herein to file a fresh appeal against the order of the acquittal passed by the learned Magistrate within a period of four weeks from the date of the order and directed this Court to consider the same on merits without raising the question of limitation. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India also granted leave to file an appeal against the acquittal and ordered that the appeal be disposed off within a period of six months. As such, this appeal is laid before this Court.

The case of the appellant:

6. According to the appellant, he promoted a company under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 in the name and style of M/s. EMAS Engineers and Contractors Private Limited (EMAS). While so, during the year 2009, the third respondent herein, namely Narayanamurthy, acting on behalf of the first accused Company, namely M/s. Premier Energy & Infrastructure Ltd. (PEIL), approached the complainant and mooted a proposal to take over the entire share holding of the complainant in the above mentioned company, namely EMAS.

7. Accordingly, a Memorandum of Understanding, dated 18.03.2015 (Ex.P-10) and thereafter another Memorandum of Understanding, dated 25.04.2015 (Ex.P-11), replacing the earlier agreement, were entered into. The essence of the agreement referred to above was that th