LAWS(MAD)-2000-12-50

ASHOK MUTHANNA Vs. WIPRO FINANCE LIMITED CHENNAI

Decided On December 15, 2000
ASHOK MUTHANNA Appellant
V/S
WIPRO FINANCE LIMITED CHENNAI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Wipro Finance Limited Chennai filed two complaints against M/s. Fidelity Industries Ltd. Chennai and its Directors and Authorised Signatory arraying them as A-1 to A-6 for the offences under Secs. 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) On receipt of summons the petitioners 1 to 4, who are accused 2 to 5, have filed these two petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to quash the entire proceedings in those two complaints on the following grounds:- (i) Mr. V.G. Subbaraman, the second petitioner (A-3), retired on 28-3-1998 itself, as evidenced by Form No. 32 issuedby the Registrar of Companies. Hence, he is not responsible for the issuance of the cheque on 23-1-1999 and the non-payment of the cheque amount after its dishonour and as such, the proceedings under Section-138 of the Act are not valid in law in so far as he is concerned. (ii) Though in the complaint, there is allegation against the petitioners that they are in-charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business of the company (A-l), no overt act or specific allegation has been attributed to these petitioners. The cheque has been signed and issued only by the 6th accused, who is the authorised signatory. Therefore, other accused, namely, these petitioners, cannot be held responsible for the offence under Section 138 of the Act.

(3.) On these two grounds, I heard the arguments of the learned Counsel on either side.