9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 978X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the petitioner is that the offence under Section 138 of the Act cannot be said to have been made out against the petitioner only on the ground that she was a joint account holder along with her husband. She has admittedly neither drawn nor issued the cheque in question and therefore the complaint against her was not maintainable. 3. The petitioner further refers to the wording of Section 138 of the Act to contend that the drawing of the cheque by a person is an essential ingredient of the offence. He submits that this is not a case of an offence having been committed by a company to which Section 141 of the Act would apply. 4. Learned Counsel for the complainant has been heard at great length. He refers to Section 11 of the Indian Pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... generally and imputes to them knowledge of the transactions in question to both of them. 6. In the first place there are certain facts which are not disputed. The cheque in question which stood dishonoured, was issued under the signature of Mr. Rajesh Berry. There is no seal of any group or association of persons or any registered body on behalf of whom Mr. Rajesh Berry was authorized to sign the said cheque. It is not dispute that the account was a joint account with the United Western Bank Limited. The relevant paragraph of the complaint pertaining to the issuance of cheque in question reads as under: 12. The accused pursuant to receiving the above said notice, approached the complainant society on or around 18th January, 2006 to s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 IPC. In the latter, it may be relevant to examine the general nature of the transactions. However, when it comes to the offence under Section 138 of the Act the wording of the statute does not admit of any lose interpretation to accommodate the situation such as the present one. The wording is to the following effect where any cheque drawn by a person on an account with a banker for payment of any amount of money... . Then such person shall be deemed to have committed the offence. 9. The Madhya Pradesh High Court had in Ajit v. Smt. Kirti dealt with the case where a cheque issued by the husband and in the printed cheque the name of his wife was also printed as both were having a joint account. The mere factor in determining whether ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
