K K MOHANDAS Vs. JAYASAMUDRI TRADING COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Does the mere fact that a partner earns share of profits of the business of the firm expose him to culpable liability under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act This is the only contentious issue of relevance raised in these Revision Petitions.

(2.) These revision petitions are preferred by accused 1 to 3 in a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I Act. Accused No. 1 is a firm and accused Nos. 2 & 3 are partners of the said firm. Accused 1 & 2 together have preferred Crl.RP 363/2001, whereas the 3rd accused has preferred Crl.R.P.320 of 2001. Petitioners 2 & 3 face a sentence of imprisonment for 6 months. They are further directed to pay an amount of Rs. 60,000/-each as compensation and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months each. No sentence or direction to pay compensation is imposed on the 1st accused firm, which allegedly stood dissolved by the time the impugned appellate judgment was passed.

(3.) The complainant alleged that offence under Section 138 of the N.I Act was committed in respect of two cheques - Exts.P6 & P7, for Rs. 70,000/- and Rs. 30,000/- respectively. Of course, Ext.P3 cheque is also seen produced. But it is the common case that the said cheque stood superceded by Ext.P7 cheque after a cash payment of Rs. 40,000/- was made. So the indictment refers to two cheques - Exts.P6 & P7, only.