Authorized signatories can be prosecuted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and valid authorization needs not be signed by all board members.

ORDER :

(M. NIRMAL KUMAR, J.)

The petitioner in Crl.R.C.No.1447 of 2019 was convicted vide judgment, dated 12.12.2017 in S.T.C.No.13 of 2016 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court, Magisterial Level at Tiruvallur (trial Court) and sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for one year and to pay a compensation of Rs.8,64,506/- to the respondent for offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 . Challenging the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur in Crl.A.No.19 of 2018 (lower appellate Court). The lower appellate Court, by judgment, dated 13.09.2019 partly-allowed the appeal modifying the sentence directing the petitioner to pay compensation of Rs.8,64,506/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for four months. Aggrieved over the same, Crl.R.C.No.1447 of 2019 is filed.

2. The petitioner in Crl.R.C.No.1448 of 2019 was convicted vide judgment, dated 12.12.2017 in S.T.C.No.12 of 2016 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court, Magisterial Level at Tiruvallur (trial Court) and sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for eight months and to pay a compensation of Rs.4,58,562/- to the respondent for offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 . Challenging the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur in Crl.A.No.18 of 2018 (lower appellate Court). The lower appellate Court, by judgment, dated 13.09.2019 partly-allowed the appeal modifying the sentence directing the petitioner to pay compensation of Rs.4,58,562/- in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for four months. Aggrieved over the same, Crl.R.C.No.1448 of 2019 is filed.

3. Earlier, the petitioner has not shown interest in proceeding with the present revisions, hence this Court by order, dated 23.04.2024 dismissed both revisions for non-prosecution, thereafter, the petitioner filed Crl.M.P.Nos.1729 & 1731 of 2025 in Crl.R.C.Nos.1447 & 1448 of 2019 to restore revisions on file. Finding that the revisions dismissed for non prosecution, not on merits and to give one more opportunity to the petitioner, this Court on 04.02.2025 restored both revisions on file. Thereafter, the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent advanced their arguments.

4. Gist of the case in STC.No.13 of 2016 is that the respondent engaged in a business of manufacturing and selling rods and bars and the petitioner purchased bars and rods TMT weighing about 9.950 metric tonnes from the respondent vide Invoice No.560, dated 20.09.2013 for Rs.4,14,400/- and purchased bars and rods weighing about 10.980 metric tonnes vide Invoice No.610 dated 08.10.2013 for Rs.4,50,106/- and thus totally liable to pay Rs.8,64,506. When the respondent demanded the said amount of Rs.8,64,506/-, the petitioner issued cheque (Ex.P2), dated 24.03.2014 bearing No.012378 drawn on Tamil Nadu Mercantile Bank Limited, Chekkadu Branch for a sum of Rs.8,64,506/- towards discharge of liability and instructed the respondent to present the cheque on the same day. The respondent presented the cheque on 24.03.2014 in Bank of Baroda, Tiruvallur Branch and the same was deposited in Royapettah Branch, Chennai, but the cheque (Ex.P2) was returned dishonored on 26.03.2014 for the reason “Funds Insufficient” and the same was intimated to the respondent. Thereafter, the respondent issued a legal notice (Ex.P4) dated