2012 (1) TMI 428 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Legality of filing a single complaint for multiple dishonoured cheques.
2. Applicability of Section 219 of the Criminal Procedural Code, 1860.

Summary:

Issue 1: Legality of filing a single complaint for multiple dishonoured cheques.

The petitioner challenged the order dated 15.4.2011 by the Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi, which issued summons against the petitioner for dishonoured cheques. The petitioner argued that respondent No. 2 filed one complaint for 14 dishonoured cheques, which is against the legal precedent that allows a maximum of three dishonoured cheques per complaint. The petitioner relied on the case of Kershi Pirozsha Bhagvagar v. State of Gujarat and Anr. 2007 Cri.L.J. 3858, which supports the filing of separate complaints for multiple dishonoured cheques.

Respondent No. 2 countered that all the cheques were part of the same transaction, and thus a single complaint was justified. They cited Lalit Fabrics Private Limited v. Linkers Associates Limited 1995 Law Suit (Del) 874, where it was held that a single complaint for multiple dishonoured cheques does not lose its validity. Additionally, cases from Andhra Pradesh High Court (B. Venkat Narendra Prasad and Anr v. State of A.P. III (2003) BC 319) and Karnataka High Court (Tiruchandoor Muruhan Spinning Mills (Private) Limited v. Madanlal Ramkumar Cotton and General Merchants 2000 Law Suit (Kar) 486) supported the filing of a single complaint for multiple cheques if they are part of a single transaction.

Issue 2: Applicability of Section 219 of the Criminal Procedural Code, 1860.

The petitioner argued that Section 219 of the Criminal Procedural Code, 1860, limits the number of offences of the same kind that can be tried together to three within a twelve-month period. The petitioner contended that each dishonoured cheque represents a separate transaction and offence, thus requiring separate complaints.

Respondent No. 2 argued that Section 219 does not apply as all cheques were part of a single transaction. They cited the case of Alpha Graphics v. Arjun Kohli 148 (2008) DLT 373, which held that the stage for determining the number of charges and trials is when charges are framed, not at the complaint filing stage. The Bombay High Court in Rajasthani Trading Co. and Anr. v. Chemos International Limited and Anr. II (2001) BC 426 also supported the view that multiple cheques from a single transaction can be tried together.

The court concluded that the filing of a single complaint for multiple dishonoured cheques from the same transaction is permissible and does not violate Section 219 of the Criminal Procedural Code, 1860. The order of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate dated 15th April 2011 was upheld, and the interim order was vacated. The petition (Crl. M. C. No. 2351/2011) was dismissed with no order as to costs.