ESI CORPORATION Vs. DEVAKI AMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Against the impugned order by which the learned Magistrate had closed the proceedings in a criminal complaint under S.138 of the N.I. Act, the complainant, an Inspector of the E.S.I. Corporation, Thrissur, has preferred this revision petition.

(2.) The proceedings were initiated against the respondent / accused by the complainant / revision petitioner alleging commission of the offence punishable under S.138 of the N.I. Act. Towards E.S.I. contribution due from the respondents a partnership firm, its managing partner, working partner and the specified principal employer, a cheque was issued. The said cheque when presented for encashment was dishonoured by the bank on the ground that sufficient amount is not available in the account. Thereupon the complainant caused a notice of demand to be issued as insisted by law. There was no useful response. It is in these circumstances that the complainant came to court with this complaint under S.138 of the N.I. Act.

(3.) Cognizance was taken and proceedings were continued. The accused persons appeared through a Counsel and deposited the entire amount due under the cheque before the court. Thereupon the learned Magistrate proceeded to pass the impugned order. The learned Magistrate in the impugned order held as follows: