O R D E R

This Petition had been filed to quash the private complaint in S.T.C.No.172 of 2020 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate (Fast Track No.I), at Nagerkoil and to quash the same as illegal as against the Petitioner/2nd Accused.

2.The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner is the wife of Accused No.1. Except the fact that she is the wife of A1, there is no averment in the Petition alleging that she had committed the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner invited the attention of this Court to the contents of the complaint. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner also invited the attention of this Court to the reported ruling of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Mrs.Aparna A.Sha -vs- M/s.Sheth Developers Pvt. Ltd., and another, reported in 2013-5-L.W. 38, wherein, it has been held as follows:

"Appellant is not a drawer of the cheque and she has not signed the same - Though it contains name of appellant and her husband, husband alone has signed -

Only the drawer of the cheque can be prosecuted.

In case of issuance of cheque from joint accounts, a joint account holder cannot be prosecuted unless the cheque has been signed by each and every person who is a joint account holder - It is an exception to Section 141 -

Process deserves to be quashed."

3.The learned Counsel for the Respondent/Complainant objected to the line of arguments seeking to quash the complaint in S.T.C.No. 172 of 2020 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate (Fast Track No.I), at Nagerkoil, stating that the Petitioner herein was instrumental in getting loan from the Respondent in favour of her husband. Therefore, the Petitioner is also liable.

4.As per the reported Ruling cited above, when the cheque is drawn by one of the joint account holders, the complainant cannot file a case against the person, who had not signed the cheque, just because A1 and the Petitioner herein as joint Account holders and are husband and wife. The complaint filed by the Respondent in S.T.C.No.172 of 2020 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate (Fast Track No.I), at Nagerkoil, is not maintainable as against the Petitioner and has to be quashed, as she had not signed the cheque, even though she is the joint account holder along with her husband. Therefore, the contention of the learned Counsel for the Respondent is rejected. The case pending in S.T.C.No.172 of 2020 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate (Fast Track No.I), at Nagerkoil, is quashed in so far as the Petitioner alone. The learned Judicial Magistrate (Fast Track No.I), at Nagerkoil, is directed to proceed with the trial and dispose of the case in S.T.C.No.172 of 2020 within a reasonable period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

The Criminal Original Petition is allowed accordingly.

In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed.

The case pending in S.T.C.No.172 of 2020 is quashed only against the Petitioner herein/A2 only. The learned Judicial Magistrate (Fast Track No.I), at Nagerkoil, is directed to dispose of the case in S.T.C.No.172 of 2020 as against A1 only within a reasonable period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

25.11.2022 Index:Yes/No cmr To The Judicial Magistrate (Fast Track No.I), at Nagerkoil.

SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP , J .

cmr Order made in CRL.O.P(MD)No.16714 of 2022

25.11.2022