Madras High Court
M/S.Roadways India Limited vs Randir Singh on 2 March, 2016
Author: P.N.Prakash
Bench: P.N.Prakash
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.03.2016 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH Crl.O.P.(MD)No.3713 of 2016 1.M/s.Roadways India Limited Represented by the Senior Branch Manager, Anirudh Vyas Prakasam Salai Chennai. 2.The Branch Manager, M/s.Roadways India Limited Prakasam Salai, Chennai. ... Petitioners/Accused 1 and 2 Vs. Randir Singh Proprietor Rajasthan Roadways S-20 AJS Towers Shakthi Nagar, Tanjore Main Road Kattur Post, Trichy ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to quash the proceedings in respect of the petitioner (A1 and A2) in C.C.No.385 of 2009 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, No.I, Trichy. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Sundaresan For Respondent : :ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.385 of 2009 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, No.I, Trichy.
2.For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as Complainant and Accused.
3.The complainant has filed C.C.No.385 of 2009 before the Judicial Magistrate, No.I, Trichy, for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. In the complaint, 10 persons have been arrayed as accused. Admittedly, this Court has quashed the prosecution as against A5 to A10 in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10923 of 2009 on 28.10.2015. After waiting patiently for the outcome of Crl.OP(MD) No.10923 of 2009, the petitioners have now come up with this quash application to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.385 of 2009.
4.The grievance of the petitioners is that A1 is the Company represented by the Branch Manager. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the prosecution as against the petitioners, namely, A1 and A2 is vitiated on this score. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Mr.Ajay Kumar Pandey, who has signed the cheque and has been arrayed as A4, is appearing before the trial Court and the present Branch Manager, who was not in service, when the impugned cheque was issued, is forced to attend for A1 and A2.
5.Admittedly, in this case, the impugned cheque has been issued from an account held by M/s.Roadways India Limited, which is a juristic person. The prosecution of others with the aid of Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act cannot be launched without making M/s.Roadways India Limited as accused. However, M/s. Roadways India Limited being a juristic person cannot be sentenced to imprisonment. But M/s.Roadways India Limited requires to be represented by some human being for the purpose of questioning, answering the questions under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure etc. Therefore, the present Branch Manager should have to necessarily appear for and on behalf of M/s.Roadways India Limited, under Section 305 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
6. Section 305 of the Code of Criminal Procedure states as follows:
?305.Procedure when corporation or registered society is an accused. -
(1) In this section ?corporation? means an incorporated company or other body corporate, and includes a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, (21 of 1860) (2) Where a corporation is the accused person or one of the accused persons in an inquiry or trial, it may appoint a representative for the purpose of the inquiry or trial and such appointment need not be under the seal of the corporation.
(3) Where a representative of a corporation appears, any requirement of this Code that anything shall be done in the presence of the accused or shall be read or stated or explained to the accused, shall be construed as a requirement that that thing shall be done in the presence of the representative or read or shall be examined shall be construed as a requirement that the representative shall be examined.
(4) Where a representative of a corporation does not appear, any such requirement as is referred to in sub-section (3) shall not apply.
(5) Where a statement in writing purporting to be signed by the managing director of the corporation or by any person (by whatever name called) having, or being one of the persons having the management of the affairs of the corporation to the effect that the person named in the statement has been appointed as the representative of the corporation for the purposes of this section, is filed, the Court shall, unless the contrary is proved, presume that such person has been so appointed.
(6) If a question arises as to whether any person, appearing as the representative of a corporation in an inquiry or trial before a Court is or is not such representative, the question shall be determined by the Court.?
7. The present Branch Manager is only the representative of M/s.Roadways India Limited, which is A1, in terms of Section 305 Cr.P.C. Therefore, it cannot be stated that his presence before the trial Court is an abuse of process of law. It is needless to state that the said Branch Manager, who is representing A1 Company in terms of the authorisation issued under Section 305 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cannot be sentenced personally. Only the Company can be sentenced to fine in the event of conviction.
8. With the above observations, this criminal original petition is closed. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
To The Judicial Magistrate, No.I, Trichy .