THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

COMMON ORDER

Although these criminal petitions arise from separate cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act, they involve the same petitioners and the same respondent No. 2/complainant in each matter. Accordingly, in the interest of judicial consistency, all these petitions were heard together and are being disposed of through this common order.

2. Criminal Petition No. 6711 of 2024 has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’), seeking the quashing of proceedings pending against the petitioners, who are arrayed as accused Nos. 4 and 5, in C.C. No. 15107 of 2022. The said case is currently on the file of the learned I Metropolitan Magistrate (Municipal Court), Nampally, Hyderabad.

3. Criminal Petition No. 6712 of 2024 has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), seeking the quashing of proceedings instituted against the petitioners, who are arrayed as accused Nos. 4 and 5, in Summary Trial Case (Negotiable Instruments) No. 705 of 2022. The said case is presently pending before the learned I Metropolitan Magistrate (Municipal Court), Nampally, Hyderabad.

4. Criminal Petition No. 6888 of 2024 has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), seeking quashing of the proceedings initiated against the petitioners, who are arrayed as accused Nos. 4 and 5, in Summary Trial Case (Negotiable Instruments) No. 1354 of 2022. The said case is currently pending before the learned I Metropolitan Magistrate (Municipal Court), Nampally, Hyderabad.

5. Criminal Petition No. 7255 of 2024 has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), seeking quashing of the proceedings initiated against the petitioners, who are arrayed as accused Nos. 4 and 5, in C.C. No. 9333 of 2022. The said case is currently pending before the learned XI Metropolitan Magistrate at Manoranjan Complex, Hyderabad.

6. I have heard Mr. E.S.Vara Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing respondent No.1-State and Mr.A.P.Suresh, learned counsel for respondent No.2/complainant.

7. Briefly stated, the relevant facts are that respondent No.2 lodged complaints seeking prosecution of the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short ‘NI Act’). Accused No.1 is a company, namely M/s. Chromgene Biotech Private Limited, having its registered office at Kummaripalem, Piduguralla, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh. Accused No.2 is stated to be the Promoter and Director of the said company. The petitioners are alleged to be its Directors.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have no involvement whatsoever in the alleged offence. He further contends that, although the petitioners were previously associated with the company, they had resigned from their positions as Directors prior to the date relevant to the alleged transactions. Their resignations were duly recorded and certified by the Registrar of Companies. Moreover, even during their tenure, the petitioners were not involved in the day-to-day operations or management of the company. In these circumstances, the continued prosecution of the petitioners amounts to an abuse of the process of law. In support of this contention, placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajesh Viren Shah v. Redington (India) Limited, 2024 INSC 111

9. Learned counsel for respondent No.2/complainant would submit that the petitioners were directors of the 1^st accused-Company, as such they were arrayed as accused.

10. I have perused the materials on record.

11. According to the respective complaints, the disputed cheques were issued on the following dates: 10.09.2020 in C.C. No. 15107 of 2022; 10.09.2020 and 21.06.2021 in S.T.C. NI No. 705 of 2022; 28.09.2021 in S.T.C. NI No. 1354 of 2022; and 10.09.2020