ANAND Vs. S M THOMAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused has come forward with the instant criminal original petition to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 11 of 1998, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No. II, Nagercoil. This Crl. O.P. has arisen in this way : According to the complainant/respondent herein, one Jeyasingh was the managing director and Anand, the petitioner herein, was the director of a company known as Eleven Star Finance Limited. On July 3, 1997, both of them approached the complainant/respondent herein for a loan of Rs. 1, 00, 000 for their business. Later on July 7, 1997, they received Rs. 1, 00, 000 as loan. On August 7, 1997, and September 4, 1997, both the accused before the learned judicial magistrate issued two cheques each for Rs. 50, 000 towards the loan, drawn on UCO Bank, Meenakshipuram, Nagercoil. THE cheques were presented by the complainant/respondent herein on December 2, 1997, through his bank.

(2.) BUT the cheques were returned on December 3, 1997, with an endorsement "funds insufficient". The complainant/respondent herein issued legal notices to both the accused on December 4, 1997. Both the notices were returned as "refused" on December 8, 1997, and on December 9, 1997. The complainant/respondent herein therefore sought to prosecute the accused under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. He preferred a complaint on January 5, 1998. Now, Anand, the second accused who has been described as the director of Eleven Star Finance Ltd., has come forward with the instant Crl. O.P. to quash the proceedings on the following grounds :

(3.) THE same view has been expressed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in K. Pannir Selvam v. M. M. T. C. Ltd., wherein it was held that minute dissection of statement in complaint could not be undertaken in quashing proceedings. THE Andhra Pradesh High Court was of the view that when a plea was raised that the accused ceased to be a director, it is a matter to be decided during the trial.