E. RANJIT KURUVILLA Vs. RAJARAM K. KINGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.9919 of 2010 is accused No.3 in C.C.No.254 of 2009 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Salem. Likewise, the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.24889 of 2010 is accused No.3 in C.C.No.502 of 2010 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate Court No.III, Salem. Both the complaints were filed by the respondent/complainant for the offence under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) For the sake of convenience the petitioner herein and respondent No.1 are referred to as "Accused No.3" and "complainant" as in the complaint. Since the points arising for consideration are one and the same, both the quash petitions are taken up for consideration together.

(3.) The contention of the accused No.3 is that a complaint was instituted under sections 138, 141 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by the complainant against the accused and three others. On receipt of Summons, accused No.3 had appeared and now seeks quashing of the complaint since the allegations therein are nothing but a motivated mala fide exercise on the part of the complainant. Despite the complainant was made aware of the fact that the accused No.3 is no way concerned with the transactions and he is not the signatory to the cheque and he had resigned from the first accused company long before the cheque was issued and hence, he cannot be vicariously held liable.