VIRENDER SINGH Vs. DASHRATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners (accused) have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing of the order dated 06.05.2013 (Annexure P-6), passed by the trial Court whereby amendment of complaint filed by respondent (complainant), under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was allowed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the cheque bearing No.512082 dated 22.06.2010 was issued in favour of M/s D.N.Earth Movers, by the account holder, namely, M/s Vishal Construction Company. The said cheque amounting to Rs.3,50,000/- was signed by the proprietor, namely, Virender Singh. He contends that upon dishonour of the cheque on 24.06.2010, legal notice was served upon M/s Vishal Construction Company through its Managing Director, namely, Virender Singh. The said notice was separately sent to petitioner No.1- Virender Singh as well describing him as Managing Director of the company. He submits that the complaint was filed by Dashrath son of Ram Kishan whereupon the cognizance was taken and process was issued. Subsequently, the application was filed on 05.03.2012 (Annexure P-4) seeking change in the name of the complainant as M/S D.N. Earth Movers as Managing partner of the firm and at the same time status of the accused-Virender Singh was sought to be changed from Managing Director to Proprietor. He submits that the trial Court had committed serious error of law in permitting the said amendment, which was opposed by filing a specific reply. He invited the attention of the Court to the reply (Annexure P-5) wherein it was mentioned that the application filed by the complainant seeks addition of party by way of amendment and if, permitted, it would amount to institution of a fresh complaint, beyond a period of limitation.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant has argued that the order passed by the trial Court is based on correct appreciation of the material on record. He submits that the basic structure of the complaint would remain intact keeping in view the contents of the cheque in question (Annexure P-1) and the legal notice (Exhibit C-3) dated 14.07.2010 sent by complainant to the notices. He submits that even complaint itself mentions the status of the Dashrath son of Ram Kishan as proprietor of M/S D.N.Earth Movers. He submits that in case the expression proprietor, is replaced with Managing Partner, it would not amount to substantive change in the complaint. It is further submitted that alteration in the status of accused Virender Singh as proprietor, instead of Managing Director would not cause any prejudice to the accused.