YUSUF KARIM KHAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Indrajit Sinha, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Rohitashya Roy the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the O.P.No.2 and Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State.

(2.) This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dtd. 23/8/2016 initiated against the petitioner under Sec. 138 read with Sec. 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, arising out of Complaint Case No.C1/117/2015, pending before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Singhbhum West, Chaibasa, Jharkhand.

(3.) The complaint case has been lodged alleging therein that the accused No.1 M/s Elder Pharmaceuticals Ltd., which is a public limited company, duly incorporated under the provisions of Indian Companies Act, 1956 and nos.2,3 and 6 (petitioners) are the Directors/authorized signatories of accused no.1, and the remaining 6 accused persons are responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the accused no.1 and it is on the alleged representations and requests of the accused no.2 (Alok Saxena), 3 (M.V.Thomas) and 6(petitioner) for and on behalf of the accused no.1, that the complainant had given Rs.25,00,000.00 (Rupees Twenty Five Lacs) only as inter-corporate deposit (loan) vide cheque No.083092 dtd. 5/3/2012 drawn on IDBI Bank for a period of 120 days and accordingly accused no.3 (M.V.Thomas) had executed a demand promissory note. The complainant has further alleged that on the due date, M/s Elder Pharmaceuticals (accused no.1) had issued a cheque no.030233 for Rs.25,00,000.00 towards the repayment of the inter-corporate deposit and cheque no.030232 towards the remittances of interest on the deposit amounting to Rs.2,08,695.00 both dtd. 30/9/2014 drawn on ICICI Bank, Nariman Point Branch, jointly signed by accused no.2 (Alok Saxena), 3 (M.V.Thomas) respectively totaling to an amount of Rs.27,08,695.00 with a view to clear the legally enforceable liability towards the complainant. However, when the aforesaid cheques in question were deposited for payment by the complainant on 20/12/2014, the said cheques were returned with an endorsement of dishonour by the concerned bank with the remark'account closed'. Information to this effect was received by the complainant on 22/12/2014 from their banker ICICI bank with the dishonoured cheque, and return memo. The complainant further claims to have sent a legal notice through its Advocate, Shri Pabitra Kumar Ray, on 1/1/2015 to the petitioner along with the other accused persons, whereby the accused were requested to make payment of the amount covered by the above two dishonoured cheques within 15 days from the date of receipt of the said notice is said to have been received by the accused persons on 5/1/2015 however, it has been averred that inspite of the service of said notice, the accused did not make payment of the amount covered by the dishonoured cheques to the complainant and subsequently the present complaint has been lodged by the O.P.No.2 against the petitioner and 9 others.