MANJU PODAR Vs. ASHWANI KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 6647-M of 1993, and Criminal Misc. No. 6577-M of 1993, as the same legal controversy is involved in both the petitions between the same parties.

(2.) THE petitioners have filed these petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for quashing the complaints dated January 2, 1993, annexure P-1 (in both the cases) filed by the respondents against them under Section 138 read with Sections 141 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short "the Act"), and also for the quashing of the summoning orders, annexure P-2. The allegations made in the complaints filed by the respondents were that Apollo Processors Private Ltd. , Old Jail Road, Amritsar, drew cheques Nos. 076548 and 076549, dated December 1, 1992, each for a sum of Rs. 1 lakh payable to the complainant-firm, Ashwani Kumar Satish Kumar. These cheques were duly signed by its director, namely, Jatinder Podar, and were drawn on Vijay Bank, Amritsar. The cheques were presented to Vijay Bank by the complainant firm for receiving the payment in question in the payee's account through the New Bank of India. These cheques were dishonoured by Vijay Bank and as per memos dated December 4, 1992, in one case and December 12, 1992, in the other case. It was stated that the matter may be referred to the drawer. The cheques were returned unpaid because the amount of money standing to the credit of the petitioners was insufficient to honour the cheques. The cheques were presented within a period of six months from the date on which the same were drawn and the complainants made a demand for the payment of the amount by giving notice in writing to the drawer of the cheque, i. e. , petitioners, within fifteen days from the receipt of information from Vijay Bank regarding return of the cheques as unpaid. Notice of dishonour of cheques was sent by the complainants through registered post acknowledgment due and under certificate of posting but no payment was made ; so complaints were filed on January 2, 1993, against the petitioners as well as Shri Jatinder Podar and the firm, Apollo Processors Private Limited. The petitioners were arraigned as accused on the allegation that they were directors of the firm and were in charge of and were responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the firm.

(3.) THE petitioners alleged that they had been illegally involved in the case and in fact petitioner No. 1 who was the wife of Jatinder Podar, the managing director of the firm, was only a housewife and had no say or control over the everyday affairs of the firm. Petitioner No. 2, Rajan Podar, son of Jatinder Podar, was only 21 years old and was a student seeking admission in post-graduate course and was not concerned with the business of the concern. They had not issued the cheques. It was further alleged that statutory notice which was required to be issued within fifteen days of the dishonouring of the cheque was not issued within the said period nor the complaints were filed within the statutory period of thirty days from the date cause of action arose to the complainants.