KANNUKINIYAL Vs. P. VEERAPPAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records the complaint in C.C. No. 427 of 2011 on the file of the Learned Judicial Magistrate No. II, Trichy and quash the same against the petitioner as illegal and void.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the petitioner is the wife of the first accused. The petitioner and her husband borrowed a sum of Rs. 15,00,000/- on 25.12.2009 at the rate of interest 18% p.a. and thereafter issued a pronote on the same date. In order to discharge liability, they issued a cheque to the respondent from their joint account dated 05.06.2010 for a sum of Rs. 15,00,000/- bearing cheque No. 025330 drawn on Dhanalakshmi Bank Limited, 12, Madurai Raod, Trichy-8. The cheque was presented before the respective bank on 14.06.2010 and the same was dishonoured on 17.06.2010 by the said bankers with an endorsement of Insufficient Fund and Dormant Account and the same was intimated to the petitioner vide letter dated 17.06.2010, which was received by the petitioner and her husband on 18.06.2010. The petitioner and her husband sent a reply dated 30.06.2010. Thereafter, the respondent filed a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act before the learned Judicial Magistrate No. I, Trichy.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the wife of the first accused. The petitioner and her husband have to sign the said cheque, the said cheque was produced before this Court bearing cheque No. 025330, drawn on Dhanalakshmi Bank Limited, 12, Madurai Road, Trichy-8. The petitioner is a joint holder of the said account. Therefore, she also has to sign the cheque, but she has not signed the same. Prosecuting against the non-signatory, is unsustainable.