9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Quashing of criminal proceedings u/s 482 CrPC regarding dishonour of a cheque.
Summary: 1. The petitioner sought quashing of criminal proceedings related to a cheque dishonour case. The complainant alleged dishonour of a cheque issued by another individual, not the petitioner. The complainant failed to establish the petitioner's involvement in the cheque issuance or non-payment, as required u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 2. The complainant contended that the accused individuals operated a coaching center, initially as a proprietorship firm, later converted to a partnership firm, and then to a company. The petitioner, a joint director of the company, was responsible for contacting the complainant for a loan and managing the business. 3. The complaint lacked clarity on the conversion timeline of the business entities and did not specify the responsible parties during the cheque issuance. It did not identify whether the cheque was issued from the proprietorship, partnership, or company account. As per legal precedent, only the drawer of the cheque can be prosecuted u/s 138 of the NI Act. Since the petitioner was not the drawer and not directly linked to the cheque dishonour, no offense was established against the petitioner. 4. Consequently, the court quashed the proceedings against the petitioner in Complaint Case No. 976/1/2005.
|
