HARDEEP SINGH NAGRA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for quashing the criminal complaints instituted against the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) A perusal of the complaints would show that besides M/s Routes Car Rentals (India) Pvt. Ltd., three other persons, including the petitioner, have been arraigned as accused. It has been alleged in paragraph 4 of the complaint that accused no. 4 i.e Hardeep Singh Nagra had given personal guarantee to the complainant in respect of repayment of loan mentioned in the complaint.

(3.) The petitioner committed no offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, merely by giving guarantee for the loans taken by accused No. 1 and 2. It is the drawer of the cheque who is liable to punishment in case the cheque used by him towards discharge in full or in part of a debut or liability, when presented to his bank for encashment, is dishonoured for want of funds and he fails to make payment within 15 days of receipt of notice envisaged in proviso (b) to Section 138 of the Act. There is no allegation in the complaint that the cheques in question were drawn by the petitioner. Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act does not fasten any criminal liability on the guarantor of a loan secured or sought to be paid by way of a cheque, which, when presented to the bank for encashment is dishonoured for want of funds. Of course, the guarantor incurs a civil liability to pay the debt guaranteed by him and his liability may be joint as well as several, but, he is not liable to be punished under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.