9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 83X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Petitioner submitted his arguments. As per his submissions, the Petitioner is arrayed as Accused No.5 in the complaint preferred by the first Respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner referred to the averments in the complaint against the Petitioner which states that the first Accused is a Company registered under the Company's Act, 1956, and engaged in the Generation, Production and sale of Electricity and the other Accused 2 to 5 are Managing Director and Directors of the Company. The Accused in the usual course of their business activities, have availed various financial/credit facilities from the Complainant bank including opening of Irrevocable Letters of Credit Fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 28.12.2014, the Petitioner had already resigned in the year 2012. The alleged cheque was issued in the year 2015. Subsequent to the date of resignation of the Petitioner/Accused No.5, the Petitioner, who is arrayed as Accused No.5, has nothing to do with the alleged offences mentioned in the complaint. 3.The learned Counsel for the Petitioner invited the attention of this Court to the reported rulings of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S.M.S.Pharmaceuticals Ltd., -vs- Neeta Bhalla and Another reported in (2007) 4 SCC 70 and in the case of National Small Industries Corp. Ltd., -vs- Harmeet Singh Paintal and Another reported in CDJ 2010 SC 153 for the proposition that before filing the complaint, the first Respondent/Complainant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ater on, payment takes place for more than Rs.5 Crores. The learned Counsel for the first Respondent/Complainant invited the attention of this Court to the particulars of Director/Designated Partner Details in respect of the Petitioner/Accused No.5 which is the copy downloaded from the website of Ministry of Corporate Affairs dated 23.06.2016 at 06.40.04 p.m. As per the said particulars, the status of the Petitioner/Accused No.5 is shown as under: Name of the Company/LLP Current designation of the Director/ Designated Partner Date of appointment at current designation Original date of appointment Date of cessation Company /LLP Status Defaulting Status SURANA &n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his Court has categorically held that A-2 and A-4 has to face the course of trial and not to invoke extraordinary powers of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In a similar case in Crl.O.P.No.21021 of 2018, dated 31.01.2022 this Court had held that what had been submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner can at best be considered as valuable defence of the accused which can be invoked at the time of trial before the learned XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Fast Track Court No.II, Egmore at Allikulam and not by exercising extraordinary power of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Therefore, the learned Counsel for the Respondent/Complainant requested this Court to dismiss this Criminal Original Petition as having no merits. 8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
