ARCHANA BAGLE Vs. BETUL OIL LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the order dated 23-9-2016 by which cognizance of offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act was taken as well as further proceedings pending in the Court of C.J.M. Betul in Criminal Case No. SC NIA/2301039/2016.

(3.) The necessary facts for the disposal of the present case in short are that the respondent has filed a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act read with Section 420 of the IPC against the applicant, M/s Amrit Feeds Limited and one Harish Bagla on the ground that the complainant is a registered Company and is dealing with Soyabean oil and its byproducts DOC. The accused no.1 M/s Amrit Feeds Limited is also a registered Company and the applicant and accused no.2 Harish are the Directors, the applicant and co-accused Harish Bagla are responsible and Incharge of day-to-day business of the Company and they are responsible for its act. The Company is carrying on its business at different places of the country. The complainant as well as accused no.1 M/s Amrit Feeds Limited had commercial relations for the last several years and the complainant was doing business with accused no.1 M/s Amrit Feeds Limited. Apart from accused no.1 M/s Amrit Feeds Limited., the applicant and accused no.2 Harish Bagla are managing as well as responsible and In-charge of other companies also. M/s Amrit Hatcheries Pvt. Limited and M/s Amricon Agrovet Private Limited are the sister concern of accused no. 1 M/s Amrit Feeds Limited. The applicant and the accused no.2 Harish Bagla, on behalf of the Company/ accused no.1 M/s Amrit Feeds Limited., approached the complainant for purchase of DOC and as per orders placed by the applicant and accused no.2, the DOC was supplied to different places through Indian railways or by road, which was received by accused persons. The accused no.1 M/s Amrit Feeds Limited. issued cheques of Rs.16,66,75,992/- under the signatures of accused no.2 Harish Bagla and the said cheques stood bounced and thereafter accused no.2 Harish Bagla tendered his apology and issued new cheques by taking the earlier cheques back. Accused No.2 Harish Bagla also sent a letter dated 13/2/2016 alongwith cheques and had explained the delay in payment and had also assured that the interest on the delayed payment shall also be paid. The earlier cheques, which were bounced, were returned by the complainant to accused no.2 Harish Bagla. In paragraph no.6 of the complaint, the details of the cheques, which were issued by accused no.1 M/s Amrit Feeds Limited., have been mentioned. The said cheques were presented before the bank, which were returned back by the bank on the ground of insufficiency of funds. A statutory notice under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act was issued on 27/6/2016, which was received by the accused persons on 1/7/2016 and 4/7/2016, but inspite of that, neither the accused persons gave any reply nor they made the payment of the cheque amount. Accordingly, a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 420 of IPC was filed.