ARRAKUNTAL V GANESHAN Vs. STATE OF AP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only point urged by the petitioners counsel in this petition is one based on Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short, the Act).

(2.) The 2nd respondent/complainant filed complaint in C.C.No.117 of 2007 on the file of Special Judicial Magistrate of the First Class for Excise Offences, Guntur alleging offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act against four accused persons. A-1 is an incorporated company. A-2 to A-4 are Directors of A-1 company. The dishonoured cheque in question was issued by A-2 with his signature representing A-1 company. After issuing the required statutory notices to A-1 to A-4, the 2nd respondent filed the complaint in the lower court.

(3.) It is only A-3 and A-4 who figured as petitioners herein. Sheet anchor of the petitioners case is S.M.S.Pharmaceuticals Limited v. Neeta Bhalla, 2007 4 SCC 70of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court referred to answers given by Division Bench of that Court in a reference to the following effect: