Authorization for filing complaints under the N.I. Act is a curable defect; a company acts through its Board of Directors, and post-initiation ratification is permissible.

JUDGMENT :

SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA, J.

Heard Mr. K. Bhattacharjee, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. A. Barman, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. P. Gupta, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 and Mr. M.J. Hazarika, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State.

2. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of the complaint as well as the proceeding vide C.R. Case No. 1106/2015 under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881, presently pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Kamrup (Metro), at Guwahati, read with Section 401 of Cr.PC.

3. One Manab Lahkar representing himself as Marketing Manager of the respondent Company M/S Gupta Hardware Pvt. Ltd. filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as “NI Act”) before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (Metro) alleging dishonour of a cheque issued by the petitioner company. The case was made over to the learned Judicial Magistrate, Munsiff No. 4, Kamrup (Metro)and the following order was passed on 26.08.2015 which is as follows:-

“The complainant has filed their evidence-on-affidavit along with original document with copies and the original documents are returned to the complainant. The evidence on affidavit and photocopies of the original documents are kept with C.R.

From the perusal of the same I have found sufficient grounds for proceeding U/S 138 N.L. Act against the accused.

Issue summons to the accused.

Complainant shall take steps. The summons shall carry copy of the complaint petition along with copies of documents which are part of complaint as per sec 204(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Fixing 16.10.2015 for Service Report/Appeaerance/O.E.”

4. After completion of prosecution evidence and closure of defence evidence, the complainant submitted a petition No. 2369 dated 18.07.2019 praying for adducing additional evidence of PW-1 and the accused submitted written objection to the said petition and after hearing both the parties, the learned Trial Court by its order dated 07.12.2019 allowed the prayer of the petitioner permitting the PW-1 to introduce a Board Resolution as well as the Power of Attorney by way of re-examination of PW-1 by invoking its powers under Section 311 Cr.PC which empowers the Court to re-examine any witness who has already been discharged after cross-examination and holding that the defence will not be prejudiced as it shall get due opportunity to cross-examine PW-1 in the event of his re-examination. Subsequently, on 30.07.2022, the complainant furnished the additional evidence on affidavit of PW-1. Thereafter, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of the instant application under Section 482 Cr.PC when the matter was pending for cross-examination of PW-1.

5. I have heard learned counsels for the parties. I have also perused the material available on record.

6. Mr. Bhattacharjee, Learned counsel for the petitioner has at the outset drawn the attention of the Court to Annexure-5 which is a General Power of Attorney executed by the Director of the complainant company which may be reproduced below (Typed copy) for the sake of convenience.

“GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY

THIS POWER OF ATTORNEY is made on this 15th day of March, 2002 by Shri Rajendra Kumar Gupta son of Late Ram Kumar Gupta, Director of M/S GUPTA HARDWARE PRIVATE LTD. Ganeshguri, Guwahati, in the District of Kamrup, Assam, do hereby appoint Shri Manab Lahkar son of Sri Gopal Lahkar, Marketing Manager M/S GUPTA HARDWARE PRIVATE LTD. Ganeshguri, Guwaha