S.S. Mishra, J.

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of the entire criminal proceeding in I.C.C. Case No.12 of 2020 pending before the learned S.D.J.M., Dharamgarh, including the order dated 25.04.2022, whereby cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as the "N.I. Act") has been taken against the petitioner and the co-accused.

Heard Mr. Manas Chand, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Tanmay Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that the opposite party is the proprietor of Bhawani Traders, dealing with hardware materials. It is alleged that hardware materials worth Rs.22,42,145/- were supplied on credit towards construction work under the Swachh Bharat Scheme, with an understanding that the outstanding amount would be paid within two months. As the amount remained unpaid, a cheque bearing No.114494 dated 07.11.2019, drawn on IDBI Bank Ltd., was issued in favour of the complainant-trader towards discharge of the outstanding liability. The cheque, upon presentation, was dishonoured for insufficiency of funds. The complainant thereafter issued a statutory demand notice dated 24.01.2020, which was returned undelivered on 30.01.2020, and subsequently instituted the complaint on 18.02.2020. The learned Magistrate, upon perusal of the complaint, the initial statement and the relevant documents including the cheque, dishonour memo, demand notice and postal documents, found prima facie material and took cognizance offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act against the petitioner and the co-accused. It is reproduced below for ready reference:-

“The Case record is put up today for taking cognizance. Learned counsel for the complainant is present and filed hazira. Heard. Perused the complaint petition, initial statement of the complainant and the original documents viz. the cheques bearing No.114494 dated 07.11.2019 for Rs. 2240125/- drawn on SBI, the dishonour memos, pleader notice, postal receipt, un-delivered notice etc. submitted by the complainant. As the offence U/s. 138 of N.I. Act is based upon documents, inquiry U/s. 202 of Cr.P.C. was conducted in this case through verification of documents only. Perused the above mentioned documents from which it reveals that there exists prima facie materials to proceed in this case against the accused persons Swarnandu Sai Pattnaik and Sunita Pattnaik U/s. 138 of N.I. Hence, cognizance of the offence U/Sec-138 NI Act is taken against accused persons Swarnandu Sai Pattnaik and Sunita Pattnaik. Hence the complainant is directed to file the requisites on 20.05.2022 for issuance of summons to the accused persons.”

The principal contention advanced on behalf of the petitioner is that the transaction in question was, in substance, between the complainant and "Srusti", a Trust, and that the cheque was issued from the account of the said Trust. It is contended that since the Trust has not been arraigned as an accused, the complaint case against the petitioner, who is stated to be associated with the Trust, is not maintainable. Reliance has been placed on the earlier decisions which, according to the petitioner, required the juristic entity responsible for issuance of the cheque to be impleaded as an accused. The petitioner has also challenged the complaint on the ground that the statutory notice and the institution of the complaint were not in accordance with the mandatory requirements of Section 138 of the N.I. Act. These grounds are substantially reflected in the petition, wherein it has been contended that the Trust was not made a party and that the complaint was allegedly filed prematurely.

Per contra, learned counsel for the opposite party submitted that the objection regarding non-impleadment of the Trust is wholly untenable in view of the subsequent authorit