DHARAM SANTOSH ENTERPRISES Vs. HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek the quashing of the complaint and the proceedings arising out of the said criminal complaint, being, No. 105/3 of 1999 filed by the respondents against the petitioners under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 read with Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Mr. B.B. Vaid, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the complaint and the proceedings are not maintainable and deserve to be quashed because no offence either under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act or under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code can be said to be have been made out by a bare reading of the criminal complaint in as much as, on the own showing of the complainant, the cheques in question were not issued by the petitioners in discharge of any existing debt or an existing liability.

(3.) After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, I feel disinclined to agree with the aforesaid submission of Mr. Vaid because the contents of the complaint do point out to the existence of a mercantile arrangement between the parties whereby the petitioners had kept in deposit a number of blank Bank cheques with the respondent -complainant and it was non the basis of the assurance and guarantee of these blank Bank cheques that the respondent -complainant company used to send goods to the petitioners accused because the arrangement included the authorization to the respondent -Company by the petitioners that on despatch of the goods by it to the petitioners, it can fill up the amount in the cheques in question representing the sale price of the goods and the date on the cheque would be the same as the date of the despatch of the goods. The complainant in the complaint has clearly averred that this mercantile arrangement was based upon and emanated from a written agreement between the parties and it was on the basis of this writ agreement that the petitioners had deposited the cheques and had also authorized the respondent -Company to fill up the amount and the date on the cheques as soon as the goods were despatched so that the amount filled in would represent the price of the goods which the respondent -Company was entitled to receive from the petitioners and the date filled in the cheque represented the date when the goods were supplied. By this mercantile arrangement, the respondent -Company had assured to itself that the supply of goods on credit (in a manner of speaking would not jeopardize its commercial interests because the "credit" would be for a very short time in the sense that the cheques would be presented to the banker for encashment and in a matter of days the amount would be realized and credited to the account of the respondent -Company.