Crl.M.C.Nos.1791/2013, 1983/2013 & 1986/2013 Page 1 of 14

$~

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

DATE OF DECISION: 10th DECEMBER, 2013

+

CRL.M.C. 1791/2013 & Crl.M.A.5559/2013

SHYAM NARAYAN MISHRA & ORS.

..... Petitioner

Through

Mr. R.S. Mishra, Advocate.

versus

STATE & ANR. & ANR.

..... Respondent

Through

Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP

Mr. R.K. Thakur, Advocate for the

respondent No.2.

WITH

+

CRL.M.C. 1983/2013 & Crl.M.A.7873/2013

SHYAM NARAYA MISHRA & ORS.

..... Petitioner

Through

Mr. R.S. Mishra, Advocate.

versus

STATE & ANR.

..... Respondent

Through

Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP

Mr. R.K. Thakur, Advocate for the

respondent No.2.

AND

+

CRL.M.C. 1986/2013 & Crl.M.A.7885/2013

SHYAM NARAYAN MISHRA & ORS.

..... Petitioner

Through

Mr. R.S. Mishra, Advocate

versus

STATE & ANR.

..... Respondent

Through

Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP

Mr. R.K. Thakur, Advocate for the

respondent No.2.

2013:DHC:6353

Crl.M.C.Nos.1791/2013, 1983/2013 & 1986/2013 Page 2 of 14

CORAM:

HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA

J U D G M E N T

: SUNITA GUPTA, J:

1.

Vide this common order, I shall dispose of three petitions, bearing

Nos.1791/2013, 1983/2013 and 1986/2013 for quashing of Criminal

Complaint No.40686/2011, titled as “Kamal Singh vs. Research India &

Ors.” u/s 138 of N.I Act, P.S. Dwarka Courts, Delhi.

2.

A criminal complaint u/s 138 read with Section 142 of the

Negotiable Instruments Act read with Section 120 IPC was filed by the

respondent complainant against M/s Research India and seven others

including the present petitioners, inter alia on the allegations that in the

month of October, 2008, Uttam Kumar Tiwari introducing himself as

Director of the firm, contacted the complainant for investment/loan of Rs.

8 lakhs for the ongoing projects of the company with assurance to return

the same with secured profits/interest and the total amount agreed by the

accused persons were Rs.20,00,000. On persistent request from all

accused, complainant agreed for the secured investment/loan of Rs. 8 lakhs

and gave two cheques of Rs. 4 lakhs each to accused no.4 i.e. Uttam

Tiwari and the accused got the amount transferred in his account. On

persistent request of the complainant, accused issued a cheque bearing

2013:DHC:6353

Crl.M.C.Nos.1791/2013, 1983/2013 & 1986/2013 Page 3 of 14

No.840001 for Rs. 20 lakhs dated 23.10.2010, which on presentation was

dishonoured with the remarks “Payment stopped by drawer”.

3.

It was alleged that accused nos. 2 to 8 are active participants in the

day to day business of accused No.1 and they are under a liability to

disburse the legally enforceable debt arising out the loan taken by accused

No.1. Accused Nos. 2 to 8 are the members of the Board of

Director/Executive. Legal notice was served upon all the accused persons

calling upon them to pay the cheque amount. On their failure to pay the

same, the complaint in question was filed.

4.

After pre-summoning, evidence was led by the complainant, all the

accused were ordered to be summoned. Application was moved by the

petitioners for stopping the proceedings qua them which was dismissed on

the ground that in view of Adalat Prasad v. Roop Lal Jindal& Ors.(2004)

7 SCC 338, that an aggrieved person cannot invoke the provisions of

Section 207 of Cr.P.C. The remedy lies in invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C

before the High Court. The revision preferred against that order was

dismissed in view of the aforesaid Supreme Court judgment. Thereafter

these petitions have been filed u/s 482 Cr.P.C for quashing of the Criminal

Complaint ,inter alia, on the allegations that respondent No.1 has been

shown as NGO/ M/s Research India and respondent No.4 Uttam Kumar

Tiwari is the