PRAFULLA MAHESHWARI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition filed under Article 227 of the constitution read with Section 482 of Cr. P. C. prays for quashing the proceedings in C. C. No. 403/ss of 2005 filed by the present respondent no. 2 under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The petition was admitted and by way of interim relief the proceedings in the said complaint pending before learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 21st Court at bandra were stayed by an ex-parte order dated 3/10/2006. The respondent no. 2, therefore, filed criminal Application No. 287 of 2007 praying for vacating the ex-parte order of interim relief. By consent of the parties the petition has been taken up for final hearing today.

(2.) THE complainant is a Government of India enterprise and established under the Companies Act, 1956. Accused no. 1 -M/s. Enbee Infrastructure Ltd. is a limited company incorporated under the Companies act, 1956 and accused nos. 2 to 9 were its Directors / additional Directors at the relevant time. The accused no. 1 approached the complainant for a loan and on its representation an amount of Rs. 1170 lakhs came to be sanctioned repayable within a period of ten years. Out of the said sanctioned loan amount a sum of Rs. 388. 20 lakhs was released to the accused no. 1 and towards the repayment of dues for the quarter ending December 2000 and March 2001 the accused had issued post dated cheques to the complainant -company and one of such cheques was cheque no. 003415 dated 31/12/2000 for Rs. 14,55,750/ -. The said cheque came to be dishonoured when submitted for encashment and, therefore, demand notice was issued on 24/5/2001 under registered post A. D. On receiving the said notice the accused did not take any steps to pay the dishonoured cheque amount within 15 days and, therefore, the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 came to be filed before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate at Bandra.

(3.) AT the first stage the petitioners had approached this Court in Writ Petition No. 3127 of 2005 for quashing the complaint and for permanent exemption of the accused from appearance before the trial Court. But the said petition was disposed by this Court on 20/1/2006 by giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the Sessions Court by fling a criminal revision application. The petitioners consequently filed Criminal Revision Application under Stamp No. 1951 of 2006 and the same was dismissed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge on 28/3/2006.