SUNIL AGGARWAL Vs. RAJWANTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Section 482, Criminal Procedure code, read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, has been filed with a prayer for quashing the complaint dated 6th January, 1999 (Annexure P-9), the summoning order dated 9th March (Annexure P-10) and further proceedings pending in the Court of Sh. Ram Singh Chaudhary, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Gohana.

(2.) RESPONDENT No. 2 is a Company incorporated under Section 149 (3)of the Companies Act, 1956 on 15th April, 1997. Petitioner Nos. 1, 2 and 6 were the first Directors of the Company. Petitioner Nos. 4 and 5 are the subscribers of the Company. It is stated that the petitioner No. 1 resigned from the directorship of the Company on 11th February, 1998. Petitioner nos. 2, 6 and 7 have also resigned. This Company floated various schemes as provided under Articles of Association permissible under the law to promote the commercial activities. The Company has acquired land in sonepat District of Haryana and also in U. P. These lands were used for cultivation of eucalyptus trees. The respondents deposited a sum of Rs. 1,12,500/- with the Company on 1st October, 1997. Petitioner No. 1, the then director of the Company, issued post-dated Cheque No. 342356, dated 1. 10. 1998 for a sum of Rs. 1,12,500/ -. On presentation of the cheque, the same was dishonoured. Intimation of dishonour was given by the respondents on 28th October, 1998. The present complaint has been filed on 6th January, 1999. Prior to the filing of the complaint, legal notice was given on 5th november, 1998. This was received by the petitioners on 7th November, 1998. Therefore, the complaint could have been filed till 22nd December, 1998. Mr. Bansal submits that these proceedings are liable to be quashed on the sole ground that the Magistrate could not have taken cognizance of the complaint as the same has been filed beyond the period of intimation under section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter refered to as "the Act" ).

(3.) A perusal of Section 142 of the Act shows that no Court can take cognizance any offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act unless the complaint is filed within month of the date on which the cause of action arises under Clause (c) of the proviso to Section 138 of the Act. The cause of action arises on the expiry of 15 days of the date of receipt of the notice given under Section 138 of the Act. As noticed above, notice was given on 15th November, 1998 (5th November?) which was received on 7th November, 1998. Therefore, cause of action arose on 22nd of November, 1998. The complaint, if any to have been filed on or before 22nd December, 1998. The present complaint admitedly filed on 6th January, 1999. On that date the magistrate did not have the jurisdiction to cognizance of the complaint. Therefore, prima facie it appears that the proceedings have to be quashed on this short ground. In view of the fact that the complaint has been filed beyond the period of limitation, the complaint cannot be permitted to proceed any further.