Cri. Revn. Appln. No. 195/11

1

IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY

APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 195 OF 2011

Shantibhau s/o. Motilal Joshi,

Partner Quality Radio,

Age 72 years, Occu. Business,

R/o. Kopargaon, Tq. Kopargaon,

District Ahmednagar.

....Applicant.

Versus

Videocon Industries, Auto Car

Compound, Adalat Road,

Aurangabad.

....Respondent.

Mr. S.M. Biyani with Mr. Rajendra Deshmukh, Advocates for

applicant.

Mr. L.B. Pallod, Advocate for respondent.

CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE, J.

DATED : 15th December, 2014.

ORDER :

1.

The revision is filed against the judgment and order

of Criminal Appeal No. 65/2010, which was pending in the Court

of Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad and which was filed by

the present petitioner against the judgment and order of SCC

No. 5773/2006, which was pending in the Court of Judicial

Magistrate, First Class, Aurangabad. The case was filed by

respondent for offence punishable under section 138 of

Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred as 'N.I. Act' for

short). The petitioner is convicted and sentenced for the offence

Cri. Revn. Appln. No. 195/11

2

and he is directed to pay fine of Rs. 1,25,000/- as against the

cheque amount of Rs. 1,00,000/-. Both the sides are heard.

2.

The respondent, Videocon Industries Limited, Public

Limited Company had filed a complaint through authorized

signatory and power of attorney holder Mr. Mukesh Jariwala

against the petitioner, who is partner of a firm by name Quality

Radio Center. The complaint was filed against other partner also.

3.

It is the case of complainant company that accused

had purchased goods on credit basis from the complainant

company. Towards part payment of the amount due to

complainant company, accused had given cheque of Rs.

1,00,000/- on 29.3.2006. The cheque was drawn on Central Bank

of India, Ahmednagar. The cheque was deposited for

encashment by the complainant company at bank from

Aurangabad. This cheque bounced with remark 'payment

stopped by the owner'.

4.

The complainant followed the procedure laid down

under the N.I. Act for filing the complaint and then complaint

came to be filed. The complainant company has its office at

Aurangabad where the complaint was filed and the cheque was

Cri. Revn. Appln. No. 195/11

3

also presented in a bank from Aurangabad for encashment. The

accused took the defence during trial that there was no legally

enforcible debt.

5.

Only the complainant gave evidence. For the

accused, in addition to the aforesaid defence, following point

was argued before the J.M.F.C.

"There was nothing on record to show that Shri.

Mukesh Jariwala was authorized by complainant

company to file complaint and Shri. Venugopal Dhoot,

the Managing Director had no power to delegate the

power given to him by company under General Power

of Attorney."

In the appeal, another point was raised for the present petitioner

like absence of local jurisdiction of J.M.F.C., Aurangabad over the

matter. The Appellate Court, Sessions Court held that at

appellate stage, such point cannot be raised. In the present

proceeding, argument was advanced on all the aforesaid three

points.

6.

The record shows that complainant company had

authorized Shri. Venugopal Dhoot by passing resolution and also

by giving General Power of Attorney. As it was not possible or

Cri. Revn. Appln. No. 195/11

4

practicable for Shri. Dhoot to file complaints and then do follow

up all over India in respect of such complaints, the complainant

company

passed

resolution

and

authorized

it's

employees/officers of different region to file complaints in

respective region. As per the resolution, these officers were

conversant with the transactions made by the company in that

area. Shri. Jariwala, the employee of the complainant company