U S KALYANI Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. The petitioner is the first accused in a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. Her husband, the second accused, is the third respondent herein. Proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner and her husband by the first respondent, Punjab National Bank, Palghat. The father of the petitioner herein, one K.N.S. Narayanan, had liabilities to the complainant bank on certain loan transactions. The petitioner herein is the legal heir of her deceased father. After the death of the father, there was an attempt to settle the loan account. It was allegedly agreed that an amount of Rs. 3 Lakhs shall be paid. Towards the said liability, the second accused allegedly issued a cheque to the complainant bank. That cheque was dishonoured on the ground of insufficiency of funds. The complainant initiated steps to prosecute the petitioner as well as her husband under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

(2.) The complaint was filed and cognizance has been taken by the learned Magistrate under Section 138 of the Act against both the petitioner and her husband. The petitioner has come to this Court complaining about the illegal action initiated against her by the complainant. She contends that in any view of the matter, the petitioner cannot have any culpable liability under Section 138 of the Act. She is not the drawer of the cheque. Even assuming that she has a liability as the legal heir of her deceased father to pay the outstanding amount in the loan account or the amount of Rs. 3 Lakhs, which is allegedly agreed to be paid in settlement of the loan account, she cannot be made liable under Section 138 for the liability as the drawer of the cheque. The petitioner is not the drawer of the cheque. She is not the account holder. She has not issued any cheque. In these circumstances the prosecution launched against her is bad and unsustainable, contends the learned counsel for the petitioner.

(3.) The respondent/complainant has been served. There is no appearance for the respondent/complainant. The short question to be considered is whether the prayer for quashing of proceedings under Section 138 of the N.I. Act against the petitioner can be sustained or not.