9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 303X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a company, every person who at the relevant point of time, was incharge of, and was responsible to, the company for conduct of the business of the company, as well as the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall also liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly. In the case on hand, A.3 to A.5 are the Directors of A.1 company and they are incharge of, and responsible to, the day to day affairs of the company. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that such an averment has been mentioned in the complaint as far as A.3 to A.5 are concerned. It is further averred in the complaint that A2 to A.6 are actively and physically participating in all the day to day business transactions of A.1 - this aspect has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ETITIONER : SRAVAN KUMAR MANNAVA FOR THE RESPONDENT : PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) ,G L V RAMANA MURTHY ORDER These Criminal Petitions, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C. ), are filed quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 582 of 2015 on the file of the IV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Guntur. Petitioners in Criminal Petition No. 11172 of 2015 are A.3 to A.5 respectively, and the petitioners in Criminal Petition No. 3938 of 2016 are A.1, A.2 and A.6 respectively, in the Calendar Case. 2. 2nd respondent herein/complainant filed a private complaint against the petitioners/accused for the offences punishable under Sections 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essential conditions under Section 138 of the Act, 1881, the complainant presented the present complaint. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that on a perusal of the complaint, there is no averment as contemplated under Section 141 of the Act, 1881 that all the accused are incharge of, and responsible to, conduct of day to day affairs of the company. It is further submitted that no specific role has been attributed to each of the accused. The learned counsel relied on a judgment in SMS Pharmaceuticals Limited v. Neeta Bhalla another. The learned counsel took this Court to various paragraphs of the said judgments and stated that it is essential that specific role has to be attributed in the complaint to each of the accuse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d debt, and when the complainant presented the said cheque, it was dishonoured on the ground of 'insufficiency of funds'. There is no dispute with regard to the said fact. 6. From a perusal of the complaint, it is clear that it is clearly averred in the complaint that A.6 is husband of A.3; A.2, A.3, A.5 and A.6 are related to each other and A.4 is their close friend, philosopher and guide; A.6 used to represent all other accused A.2 to A.5. It is further averred in the complaint that A.2 to A.6 are actively and physically participating in day to day business transactions of A.1 on their joint/collective/joint and several liability and responsibility in respect of all the matters and affairs of A.1 company and obligations, liabil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where any offence under this Act has been committed by a company and it is proved that the offence has been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to, any neglect on the part of, any director, manager, secretary or other officer of the company, such director, manager, secretary or other officer shall also be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly. Explanation.-For the purposes of this section, - (a) company means anybody corporate and includes a firm or other association of individuals; and (b) director , in relation to a firm, means a partner in the firm. 9. A perusal of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ken place. Admittedly, prima facie, the basic ingredients of Section 141 (1) of the Act, 1881 has been satisfied and the ground that the specific role has to be stated in the complaint, is not necessary. 10. A.1 is a company and A.2 is a person who signs cheques on behalf of A.1, and A.3 to A.5 would all come within the purview of Section 141 (1) of the Act, 1881 where the basic averments would suffice to come to a conclusion that they are responsible for conduct of the business of the company. In respect of these accused, it is not necessary that a specific role has to be attributed as against them in view of the complicity of the accused as prima facie case has been made out going by the accusation that contained in the complaint. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
