ARRAKUNTAL V GANESHAN Vs. SAI RAM COTTON SYNDICATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application is filed by the petitioner, who is A-3, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.'), seeking to quash the proceedings against him in C.C. No. 570 of 2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate (Excise), Guntur. A private complaint was filed by the 1st respondent against the petitioner and others, alleging that the 1st accused is a firm carrying on business in cotton, 2nd accused is the Managing Director of the said firm, for which accused Nos. 3 and 4 are Directors. It is alleged that all the accused have been actively participating in the day-to-day transaction of the company, and with the consent and knowledge of accused Nos. 3 and 4, 2nd accused issued four cheques on behalf of the 1st accused. The said cheques, when presented, were returned due to insufficient funds. After complying with legal requirements as contemplated under the provisions of the Act, a private complaint came to be filed against the accused.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner mainly contends that even accepting the allegations in the complaint are true, no offence is made out against the petitioner, who was only a director of the company, and as such, continuation of proceedings against him would amount to an abuse of process of law.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the 2nd respondent-State opposed the petition contending that in view of the allegations made against the petitioner, this Court should not invoke its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code and interdict the proceedings. Though notice was sent to the correct address of the 1st respondent, the same could not be served. Hence, the counsel for the petitioner was permitted to serve notice on the counsel appearing for the 1st respondent in the trial Court. Accordingly, notice was served on the counsel for the 1st respondent appearing in the trial Court and proof of service is also filed.