JAGANNATH SARANGAPANI,MANAGING DIRECTOR Vs. VARSANA ISPAT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Mr.Anand B. Gogia, learned advocate waives the service of notice of rule on behalf of the original complainant and Mr.K.P. Raval, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State, in both these petitions.

(2.) Mr.D.Hanumanth Rao, learned counsel appearing with Ms.Sonal Vyas, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner - original accused No.5, has vehemently submitted that as such the petitioner - accused No.5, is an Additional Director in the accused No.1 Company and is in no manner responsible for day-to-day functioning of the Company and the cheques in question have not been issued by the petitioner, despite which the petitioner is joined as accused in the impugned complaint for dishonour of the cheques in question for the offence punishable under section 138 of N.I. Act.

(3.) Both these petitions are opposed by Mr.Gogia, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original complainant.