URMILABEN PARESHBHAI KOTHIYA Vs. HDFC BANK LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application under section 482 of the Cr.P.C., 1973, the applicant-original accused No.3, seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this Court praying for quashing of the proceedings of the Criminal Case No.633 of 2017 in the court of the 11th Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot arising from the complaint filed by the respondent No.1-original complainant for the offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) It appears from the materials on record that the respondent No.1-H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd. filed a complaint under section 138 of the Act against a partnership firm and its partners. The partnership firm is the accused No.1 in the complaint and the accused Nos. 2 to 11 are the partners of the firm. The applicant herein is the accused No.3 in the complaint. The complaint reads as under;

(3.) Mr. Aditya A. Gupta, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant-accused vehemently submitted that the complaint under section 138 of the Act is not maintainable as his client is neither the signatory to the cheques in question nor the partner of the firm. According to the learned counsel, the applicant was one of the sleeping partners in the partnership firm. The applicant came to be inducted as a partner vide the partnership deed dated 08.06.2009. The partnership was, thereafter, reconstituted on 31.12.2014 vide the partnership deed dated 31.12.2014. In the said deed, it has been recorded that the applicant and the others have retired as the partners on 7.10.2014 in pursuance to an understanding arrived at between the partners. The learned counsel invited my attention to the following averments made in paras-6 and 7 of the present application;