Advocates:
VIKAS MEHTAASHA GOPALAN NAIR

1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.73 OF 2007

A.C. NARAYANAN

… APPELLANT

V/s

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

… RESPONDENTS

With

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1437 OF 2013

SHRI G. KAMALAKAR

… APPELLANT

V/s

M/S SURANA SECURITIES LTD. & ANR.

… RESPONDENTS

J U D G M E N T

SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, J.

As the question of law involved is common in both the

appeals, they are heard together and disposed of by this common

judgment.

Criminal Appeal No.73 of 2007

2.

Brief facts of the case are as follows:

The accused–appellant,A.C. Narayanan challenged the common

order dated 29^th November, 2000 passed by the Additional Chief

Metropolitan Magistrate, 9^th Court, Bandra, Mumbai (hereinafter

referred to as the, ‘Trial Court’) by filing applications u/s 482

Digitally signed by

Neeta Sapra

Date: 2015.01.28

16:10:11 IST

Reason:

Signature Not Verified

2

of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the High Court.

By the said common order the applications preferred by the

appellant-A.C.Narayanan for discharge/recalling process against

him was rejected by the Trial Court. The High Court by impugned

judgment dated 12^th

August, 2005, dismissed the applications

preferred by the appellant and upheld the order passed by the

Trial Court.

3.

The appellant is the Vice-Chairman and Managing Director of

the Company M/s Harvest Financials Ltd. (hereinafter referred to

as the “Company”) having its registered office at Bombay. Under a

scheme of investment, the appellant collected various amounts

from various persons in the form of loans and in consideration

thereof issued post-dated cheques either in his personal capacity

or as the signatory of the Company which got dishonoured.

4.

Respondent No. 2-Mrs. Doreen Shaikh is the power of attorney

holder of six complainants, namely Mr.Yunus A. Cementwalla, Smt.

Fay Pinto, Mr. Mary Knoll Drego, Smt. Evelyn Drego, Mr. Shaikh

Anwar Karim Bux and Smt. Gwen Piedade. On 16^th December, 1997,

Respondent No.2 on behalf of the six complainants filed Complaint

Case Nos.292/S/1998, 293/S/1998, 297/S/1998, 298/S/1998,

299/S/1998 and 300/S/1998 respectively against the appellant

herein under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments

Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as the, ‘N.I. Act’) before the

Trial Court. The said Respondent No. 2 verified the complaint in

3

each of those cases as Power of Attorney Holder of the

complainants. The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate vide

order dated 04^th April, 1998 issued process against the appellant

u/s 204 of the Cr.P.C for the offences punishable under Sections

138 and 142 of the N.I. Act.

5.

The appellant, being aggrieved moved an application for

discharge/recall of process in each of the complaints. The Trial

Court vide common order dated 29^th November, 2000 dismissed the

applications filed by the appellant.

6.

The appellant being aggrieved preferred applications being

Criminal Application Nos.797, 798, 799, 801, 802 and 803 of 2002

before the High Court for calling for the records of the case

pending in the Trial Court. By impugned order dated 12^th August,

2005 the said applications were dismissed by the High Court.

Criminal Appeal No.1437 of 2013

7.

The brief facts of the case is as follows:

This appeal has been preferred by the accused-G. Kamalakar

against the judgment and order dated 19^th September, 2007 passed

by the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh of Hyderabad in

Criminal Appeal No. 578 of 2002. By the impugned judgment, the

High Court allowed the appeal preferred by the 1^st respondent-

M/s Surana Securities Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the

‘Company’) set aside the judgment of acquittal dated 30^th

October, 2001 passed by the XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate,

4

Hyderabad in CC No.18 of 2000 convicted the appellant under

Section 138 of the N.I. Act and sentenced the appellant to