LAWS(GJH)-2014-4-15

KESARBEN KANJIBHAI CHAM Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On April 11, 2014
Kesarben Kanjibhai Cham Appellant
V/S
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these Criminal Misc. Applications have been filed to quash and set aside the complaints being Old Criminal Complaint Nos.1011 of 2002(New No.2881 of 2008), 1012 of 2002(New No.2879 of 2008), 431 of 2002(New No.2877 of 2008), 432 of 2002 (New No.2874 of 2008), 433 of 2002 (New No.2876 of 2008), 434 of 2002 (New No.2882 of 2008), 435 of 2002 (New No.2875 2008), 436 of 2002(New No.2880 of 2008), 437 of 2002 (New No.2878 of 2008) filed against the petitioners by the respondent No.2 -complainant pending before learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.11, Ahmedabad.

(2.) ALL the complaints were filed by respondent No.2 -Trident (India) Ltd. It is alleged in the complaints that as part of business, the complainant used to advance money to accused No.1, a partnership firm, in which accused Nos.2 to 6 are partners and they are responsible for the day -to -day affairs of accused No.1 firm. It was also alleged that the money advanced to accused No.1 firm was assured by its partners to be adjusted by purchasing Duty Exemption Pass Book( DEPB) licenses of various values failing which, money would be returned back. As the accused No.1 did not pay up the money advanced, accused No.1 issued nine different cheques of various dates to the tune of Rs.1,90,00,000/ -. However, when the said cheques were presented with the bank, same were returned with the endorsement "insufficient funds". Hence, a notice was issued to the accused on 26 -4 -2002 which was received on 30 -4 -2002. However, evasive replies were given vide reply dated 8 -5 -2002 and 9 -5 - 2002. Hence, nine different complaints were filed for the offences punishable under Section 138 read with section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and same are pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.11 at Ahmedabad. Hence, the present petitions for quashing.

(3.) RULE . Learned APP, Mr.L.R.Pujari for the respondent No.1 and learned advocate, Mr.Bhadrish S.Raju for the respondent No.2 waive service of notice of rule.