NAVEEN KUMAR KEDIA @ NAVEEN KEDIA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above titled six petitions pertain to six criminal complaints filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act read with Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code regarding dishonour of cheques (Rs.55,000/- in Crl. Complaint Case No. 1797/03, Rs.55,000/- in Crl. Complaint case No.6050/1, Rs.47,500/- in Crl. Complaint case No.1799/ 1/03, Rs.95,000/- in Crl. Complaint case No.6102/l/04,Rs.37,500/- in Crl. Complaint Case No. 1798/1/03 and Rs.55,000/- in Crl. Complaint Case No.6103/1/04) and the aforesaid cheques were issued on behalf of M/s Kedia Distilleries Limited towards discharge of their rental liability. Aforesaid cheques, on presentation, were dishonoured, which led to filing of the afore said criminal complaints through attorney Shri S.K. Pahwa. Petitioner has been summoned by the trial court vide order dated 6th August, 1998 (impugned in Crl.M.C.No.3011,3013 and 3015) and vide order dated 3rd September, 2008 (impugned in Crl.M.C.No.3012,3014 and 3016) in the aforesaid five criminal complaints as an accused, in the capacity of the Vice Chairman of the above said company.

(2.) AFORESAID summoning order has been assailed by the petitioner in these six petitions, which have been heard together and are being disposed of together by this common order.

(3.) IT has also been urged on behalf of the petitioner that the complaint under challenge has been filed on the basis of second notice of demand, without preferring the complaint on the first notice and thus the criminal complaints in question are time barred. Lastly, it is contended on behalf of the petitioner that he being the Vice Chairman of the accused company, cannot be deemed to be responsible for the day to day conduct of the business of the accused company and petitioner has been illegally summoned and, therefore, the impugned order deserves to be set aside.