RAJKUMAR NAHATA Vs. HARITA FINANCE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FOR the Heard the petitioner's counsel. All these five applications were filed by the same petitioner, who is accused No. 2 in five criminal cases pending before the XIVth and XIIIth Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Madras, and the petitioner/A-2 seeks to quash the proceedings in five criminal cases under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code.The first petition in Crl. O.P. No. 1408 of 1998 is filed by the petitioner/A-2 by name Rajkumar Nahta, who is said to be the director of the first accused company under the name and style of Marginal Dyeing and Manufacturing Company Limited at Bombay to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 2263 of 1996 on the file of XIVth Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Madras, and it relates to the return of a cheque dated November 21, 1995, issued by the first accused company represented by its director the petitioner/A-2 for a sum of Rs. 24, 99, 013.The second petition in Crl. O.P. No. 1409 of 1998 is filed by the very same petitioner under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 2261 of 1996 on the file of the very same magistrate and it relates to the cheque dated November 21, 1995, issued by the first accused company represented by its director the petitioner/A-2 for a sum of Rs. 24, 98, 481.The third application Crl. O.P. No. 1410 of 1998 is filed by the very same petitioner under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 3059 of 1996 on the file of the very same magistrate and it relates to a cheque dated February 10, 1996, issued by the first accused company represented by the director, the petitioner/A-2 for a sum of Rs. 1, 04, 588.The fourth application, Crl. O.P. No. 1411 of 1998, is filed by the very same petitioner under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 5184 of 1996 on the file of the XIIIth Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Madras, and it relates to two cheques dated December 14, 1995, issued by the first accused company represented by the petitioner/A2 for a sum of Rs. 24, 98, 968 and Rs. 24, 99, 445, respectively.The fifth application in Crl. O.P. No. 1412 of 1998 is filed by the very same petitioner under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 2587 of 1996 on the file of the XIVth Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Madras, and it relates to the return of the cheque dated January 10, 1996, for a sum of Rs. 1, 04, 588.Learned senior counsel, Mr. Habibullah Basha, appearing for the petitioner in all these five petitions contended that the petitioner was a director of the first accused company which had business at Bombay and the respondent/complainant entered into bill discounting with the first accused company, and in discharge of the liability, the first accused company had issued cheques on several dates for several amounts as mentioned in all these five applications and when the respondent-complainant deposited the cheques, they were returned unpaid for the reason "insufficient funds" or "not arranged" or "refer to drawer" and later the respondent-complainant filed the complaint for the offences under sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, not only against the first accused company but also against the petitioner/A2 who was only a director, and no offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is made out and the complaint is filed by the respondent/complainant suppressing several material facts, and the first accused company was wound up by an order of the High Court of Gujarat, which appointed an official liquidator, and in these circumstances all the complaints filed by the respondent/complainant as against the petitioner/A2 are not maintainable, and in these circumstances, the proceedings in all these five cases should be quashed under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code.Learned senior counsel also placed reliance upon some decisions which are as follows.

(2.) HE brought to my notice the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Khosla Fans (India) P. Ltd. (In Liquidation), In re. That was a case where the official liquidator filed a complaint against the respondents under sections 538 , 478 re ad with section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956, alleging that the respondents being officers of the liquidated company failed to deliver to the liquidator as desired by him all the movable and immovable properties of the company which was in their custody and control and which in law they were enjoined upon to deliver after the company was ordered to be wound up.

(3.) EVEN otherwise only stay was granted by the Bombay High Court but the criminal proceedings pending before the magistrate's court were not quashed by the Bombay High Court under article 227 of the Constitution of India and section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code.