9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 1506X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e complaint can be filed against an accused if a valid demand notice has been given to that accused and payment was not made by him. In the present case, M/s Excel Telecom may be a proprietary firm or a partnership firm, no notice has been given to the applicant either in his personal capacity or being proprietor of the aforesaid firm and when no demand notice was given within the time fixed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act then no complaint can be prosecuted against the applicant. In the light of the provision of Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act when the complaint could not be prosecuted against the applicant then he could not be added as an accused in the complaint by moving a simple amendment application. The tria ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case in short are that one shop was taken on rent by M/s Excel Telecom, 2/179 New Colony Birla Nagar, Gwalior and a cheque of Rs.35,000/- relating to rent of that shop was tendered by the applicant to the respondent. The cheque was dishonoured, thereafter respondent prosecuted the aforesaid partnership firm through its partner Deepak Gupta and Sanjeev Basu. After sometime, it was found that the concerned firm was not a partnership firm but it was a sole proprietary concern run by the applicant, therefore such application was moved before the trial Court which was dismissed vide order dated 06-11-2008. On filing of petition before this Court, vide order dated 08-05-2012 the matter was disposed off by consent of parties that a fresh appl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... endment before the trial Court but it was mentioned that the application should be decided according to the provisions of law and there is no provision of such amendment in the Cr.P.C. The trial Court could not pass such order when it has no inherent power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed his reliance upon the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of S.R. Sukumar V. S. Sunaad Raghuram , (2015 Cri.L.J. 3829). In this judgment, the authority of trial Court has been emphasized as to whether the amendment in the complaint may be done or not. In the light of that judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of S.R. Sukumar (supra) such amendment could not be allowed in the present petition witho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
