Facts
Decision
R. Rajgopal
v.
S.s. Venkat
(Supreme Court Of India)
Criminal Appeal No. 170-172 Of 2000 (Arising Out Of S.L.P.(Cri.) No. 3142-3144 Of 1999) | 11-02-2000
Leave granted.
The only ground, on which the complaint filed by the petitioner against the respondent for the offence under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act has been quashed by the High Court is that the Company (the partnership firm in this case) on whose behalf the cheque was issued was not made an accused in the complaint. Respondent who is the partner has been made an accused.
The aforesaid stand of the High Court cannot now be sustained in view of the pronouncement of law on the subject in Anil Hada v. India Acrylic Limited, 1999 SC 853).
Learned counsel for the respondent then submitted that there are other contentions which respondent has to raise as against the prosecution. We are not disposed to deal with all those contentions, for, it is open to the respondent to raise such contentions in the trial Court.
In the result we set aside the impugned judgment and direct the trial Court to proceed with the trial.
The appeals are disposed of.
The only ground, on which the complaint filed by the petitioner against the respondent for the offence under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act has been quashed by the High Court is that the Company (the partnership firm in this case) on whose behalf the cheque was issued was not made an accused in the complaint. Respondent who is the partner has been made an accused.
The aforesaid stand of the High Court cannot now be sustained in view of the pronouncement of law on the subject in Anil Hada v. India Acrylic Limited, 1999 SC 853).
Learned counsel for the respondent then submitted that there are other contentions which respondent has to raise as against the prosecution. We are not disposed to deal with all those contentions, for, it is open to the respondent to raise such contentions in the trial Court.
In the result we set aside the impugned judgment and direct the trial Court to proceed with the trial.
The appeals are disposed of.
Advocates List
For the Appearing Parties ----
For Petitioner
- Shekhar Naphade
- Mahesh Agrawal
- Tarun Dua
For Respondent
- S. Vani
- B. Sunita Rao
- Sushil Kumar Pathak
Bench List
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.T. THOMAS
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.B. SHAH
Eq Citation
2000 (3) ACR 1881 (SC)
2001 (1) ALT (CRL) 384
2001 (2) KLJ 677
AIR 2001 SC 2432
2001 (4) ALLMR (SC) 880
2001 CRILJ 4936
2001 (1) ALD (CRL) 66
2001 (4) MPHT 287
JT 2000 (5) SC 503
LQ/SC/2000/313
HeadNote
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Ss. 138 and 142 — Misfeasance by partner — Company on whose behalf cheque issued not made an accused — High Court quashed complaint filed by petitioner against respondent for offence under S. 138 — Held, stand of High Court cannot be sustained in view of law laid down in Anil Hada case, (1999) 1 SCC 853 — Respondent can raise other contentions in trial Court (Paras 1, 3 and 4)
Thank you for subscribing! Please check your inbox to opt-in.
Oh no, error happened! Please check the email address and/or try again.
Deleting Note..
Are you sure you want to move this note to trash?
