RADHAKRISHNAN PARAPPURATH Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three Criminal Revision Petitions are filed by the accused in three prosecutions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The petitioner is the Managing Director of M/s. Parapurath Chitties (P) Ltd., who issued three cheques on behalf of the company as its authorised signatory, to the 2nd respondent each of which is the subject matter of these three Criminal Revision Petitions. Those cheques were dishonoured on presentation for want of sufficient funds in the account of the company. The complainant filed three complaints before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Ernakulam, as C.C.Nos.1667, 1668 & 1669 of 2009. The Magistrate convicted the petitioner and directed the petitioner to pay the cheque amount as fine with a default sentence. The petitioner filed Criminal Appeal Nos. 718, 719 & 720 of 2011. The appeals were dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge(Ad-Hoc-I) Ernakulam. Against those judgments the petitioner has filed these three Criminal Revision Petitions.

(2.) THE petitioner does not dispute the execution of the cheque or the liability of the company to pay the amounts covered for the cheques. The only contention raised by the petitioner is that a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act would not lie against the Managing Director of the Company without arraigning the company also an accused, which has not been done in this case. The petitioner relies on the decision of the Supreme Court in Aneeta Hada Vs Godfather Travels & Tours Pvt. Ltd. [2012 (2) KLT 736 (SC)], in support of his contention.

(3.) I have considered the rival contentions in detail.