D SENDILKUMAR Vs. M SADASIVAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE is no representation for the Respondent. Hence, upon hearing the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the Petitioner and after perusing the materials available on record the following order is hereby passed.

(2.) THE 3rd accused in a case instituted on private complaint for an offence punishable under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by the respondent herein/complainant, has come forward with this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing the complaint in so far as it relates to the present petitioner. THE respondent herein is the complainant in C.C.No.151 of 2006, now pending on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate, Rasipuram.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner contends that when an offence punishable under Section 138 is alleged to be committed by a company, then as per Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a director of such company shall be deemed to be guilty of such offence, provided it is proved that the offence has been committed with the consent, or connivance of, or is attributable to any neglect on the part of such director. It is the further contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the deeming provision against the director shall not be enough to render the director liable for punishment unless specific averments are made in the complaint to the effect that such a director was in charge of and was responsible to the company for the conduct of its business.