BIGHNORAJ MOHAPATRO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application U/S.482 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner seeking to quash the orders passed on 29/11/2008 and 6/1/2015 by learned S.D.J.M., Bolangir in 1.C.C. Case No.128 of 2008 taking cognizance of offence U/S.138 of N.I. Act and issuance of summon to the petitioner respectively as well as consequently the entire criminal proceeding.

(2.) The inter-se dispute between the parties lies in a narrow compass of dishonor of cheques, but the complaint is claimed to be not maintainable by the petitioner on technicality. Hence, this Court while refraining itself from elaborating the entire gamut of facts involved in this case reiterates only the relevant facts for disposal of the CRLMC. OPNo.2 as complainant has instituted a complaint in 1.C.C. Case No.128 of 2008 against (i) Purchase Officer, District Purchase Centre (petitioner) (ii) Smt. J. Bhoi, In-Charge, Paddy Procurement Centre and (iii) The Civil Supply Officer-Cum-Divisional Manager, all working in Orissa State Civil Supply Corporation (OSCSC) Ltd., Bolangir for commission of offence U/Ss.420/120(B)/34 of IPC and Sec. 138 of N.I. Act.

(3.) In the course of hearing the CRLMC application, Mr. Trilochan Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner relying upon the decisions (i) Jaysingh v. K.K. Velayutham and another; (2006) 9 SCC 414, (ii) K. Suresh v. M/s. Lloyds Finance Ltd. and another; 2009 (1) Crimes 321 (Delhi) and K. Suresh and others v. Arihant Hire Purchase Co. Ltd.; (2007) 2 GLR 375 submits that since the petitioner was working as a Purchase Officer at the relevant time of issuance of cheques for OSCSC Ltd., no liability U/S.138 of N.I. Act can be attracted against the petitioner. It is further submitted by him that the act of the petitioner being in due discharge of his official duty, the same cannot be constituted as personal liability, rather the action of the petitioner is protected by Sec. 197 of Cr.P.C. by which prior sanction is mandatorily required before taking cognizance of any offences including offence U/S.138 of N.I. Act, but the learned S.D.J.M., Bolangir has taken cognizance of offence without obtaining prior sanction U/S.197 of Cr.P.C. against the petitioner and thereby, the proceeding against the petitioner is not maintainable in the eye of law. It is accordingly prayed by the learned counsel for the petitioner to quash the impugned orders.