Heard both sides.
2.This criminal original petition has been filed under
Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for records in S.T.C.No.163 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Madurai and quash the same.
3.It is averred in the petition that the cheques in question were issued by the second respondent/A1 in favour of the complainant as the Proprietor of Dhanalakshmi Textiles and the petitioner, being the son of the second respondent has also been arrayed as an accused. No offence would be made out against the petitioner as the cheques were issued by the Proprietor of the Firm. The petitioner is working as a Software Engineer at Bangalore for the past five years and he has not been served with the statutory notice as contemplated under the Negotiable Instrument Act. The cheques were issued in the name of Shri.Dhanalakshmi Textiles by the second respondent alone, in the capacity as the Proprietor. Therefore, the proceeding as against the petitioner is to be quashed.
4.The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has never taken part in the business and he is not the signatory to the cheques issued in favour of the complainant and no offence as alleged by the complainant is made out as against the petitioner and therefore, the proceeding is to be quashed.
5.The learned counsel for the first respondent, per contra, contends that the petitioner also took part in the business activities and both the petitioner as well as his father came to the defacto complainant and issued post dated cheques after taking money from them and therefore, he is also liable for the offence.
6.Admittedly, the cheques in question were issued on behalf of Dhanalakshmi Textiles as proprietary concern and the same was signed by the second respondent, who is arrayed as A1 in this case. The petitioner is not the signatory to the cheques and there are no documents to connect the petitioner either to the Trade run by Shri.Dhanalakshmi Textiles and Ambiga Yarns or to connect with this case. It is pertinent to note that even statutory notice has not been issued to the petitioner.
7.Under the above circumstances, the proceeding as against the petitioner in S.T.C.No.163 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Madurai, is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is allowed and the proceeding in S.T.C.No.163 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Madurai is quashed. The trial Court is directed to disposed of the case as against the remaining accused, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and report to the Registry. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition are also dismissed.
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Madurai..