V KANNAN Vs. S SUBRAMANIAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE Criminal Original Petition are filed to quash the complaints and all further criminal proceedings as against the petitioner in CC.Nos.450, 449, 451, 452 and 453/2005 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate I, Pondicherry.

(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution as culled out from the complaints are as follows:-

(3.) MR.Gupta, the learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate of the offences against the petitioner is illegal, as he had resigned from the Board of the Company as early as on 9.6.2004 and he was not the signatory to the cheques in question or possessing any executive powers during that time. He would contend that it is the obligation of the complainant to prove that at the time when the offence was committed the accused was in charge of and responsible to the Company for the conduct of its business and in the absence of any such averment to that effect in the complaint, initiation of prosecution and the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate are illegal.