AMAN KUMAR HARJAI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Quashing of criminal complaint CC No. 121/01/2006, under Section 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 titled as Vishesh Infotecnics Ltd. Vs. Aman Harjai & ors. and the summoning order of 18th February, 2006 is sought on merits in this petition.

(2.) At the hearing, it was submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that petitioner is neither proprietor, director, managing partner nor employee or authorized signatory of the accused-company and has never dealt with the accused-company in any manner. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that there is no averment against the petitioner in the complaint in question and therefore, summoning order of 18th February, 2006 is unwarranted and deserves to be quashed. It is submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that Notice under Section 251 of the Cr.P.C. has not yet been framed in this case and matter is now coming up for hearing on 13th April, 2015 before the trial court and petitioner be permitted to appear through counsel in this case.

(3.) Since petitioner has an alternate and efficacious remedy available to him to urge the pleas taken herein before trial court at the time of framing of Notice under Section 251 of Cr.P.C., therefore, this Court finds that inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. are not required to be invoked to quash the proceedings arising out of the complaint in question. It is being so said in view of dictum of the Apex Court in Bhushan Kumar & Anr. Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr., 2012 AIR(SC) 1747, which persuades this Court not to exercise inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to entertain this petition. The pertinent observations of Apex Court in Bhushan Kumar , are as under:-