Karnataka High Court
M/S Tiffins Barytes Asbestos vs M/S Udhyaman Investments Pvt Limited on 1 August, 2016
Author: Aravind Kumar
Bench: Aravind Kumar
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2016
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2985/2015
BETWEEN:
1. M/S TIFFINS BARYTES ASBESTOS
AND PAINTS LTD.
NO.14 AND 16,
GOPALAKRISHNA STREET WEST T NAGAR,
CHENNAI-600017.
2. MR. SRIRAM VEDAM
S/O SWAYAMBUVEDAN
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
3. MRS. NANDITA VEDAM
W/O SRIRAM VEDAM
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
PETITIONERS 2 AND 3 ARE
RESIDING AT NO.28, BALAJI AVENUE,
IST STREET, T NAGAR,
CHENNAI-600 017,
TAMILNADU, INDIA.
4. KANIYUR CHELLAPPALYER SUNDARAJAN BABU
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS
OLD NO.12, NEW NO.49,
SCHOOL ROAD, AGRAHARAM KANIYUR
UDUMALAPET, COIMBATORE-642203
TAMILNADU, INDIA.
5. MR.RANGNATHAN SWAYAMBU
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS
NEW NO.174, 3RD CROSS STREET,
LAKSHMINAGAR,
:2:
CHENNAI-600 116,
TAMILNADU, INDIA. ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI S.N.ASHWATHNARAYAN, ADV. (ABSENT)
AND:
M/S UDHYAMAN INVESTMENTS PVT LIMITED
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT I FLOOR
EMBASSY POINT
NO.150, INFANTRY ROAD,
BANGALORE-560 001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
AUTHORISED SIGNATORY,
MR M POOBALAN. ...RESPONDENT
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE
FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT
MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE ORDER OF ISSUE OF
PROCESS AND ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS FOR THE OFFENCES
P/U/S 138 OF N.I. ACT OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC,
BELLARY IN C.C.NO.1687/2014 AGAINST THE PETITIONER AT
VIDE DOCUMENT NO.1 & 2.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The respondent filed a complaint under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. against petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and seeking quashing of said proceedings, this petition is filed.
2. The gist of the complaint is that complainant is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and carrying on the business of designing, planning, managing, :3: developing and/or construction of apartment, factory buildings, etc. It is stated that accused Nos.2 to 5 approached the complainant seeking for urgent funds and proclaiming that they are Directors of first accused - company. It is stated that accused Nos.2 to 5 sought for an amount of Rs.11.50 Crores from the complainant. Hence, believing the words and promises of accused as true, a payment of Rs.11.50 Crores was made to the accused directly to the bank account of first accused - company. It is stated that said amount was not paid as agreed to by the accused and after much persuation, cheque for Rs.8,82,68,439/- was issued by accused Nos.2 to 5 and the said cheque was duly signed by the authorised signatory of the first accused - company i.e., 6th accused. Said cheque when presented has been dishonoured for the reason 'insufficient funds' and notice issued to the accused persons has been duly served and an untenable reply has been issued. Hence, complainant requested for the jurisdictional Court to take cognizance of the said offence.
:4:
3. The jurisdictional Court i.e., JMFC, Ballari, having taken cognizance of the said offence has issued processes and non-bailable warrant against the petitioners/accused and same is questioned in the present petition contending that cheques in question had been stolen and there is prima facie material to show that they were stolen cheques and hence none of the ingredients of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are attracted. Hence, proceedings initiated against accused-petitioners be quashed.
4. As to whether the cheques in question had been stolen as contended by the accused persons is a factual issue which is required to be adjudicated by rendering evidence and it is within the domain of the jurisdictional court. In the absence of such evidence, no finding can be recorded in that regard and as such, extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court cannot be exercised for quashing the proceedings. In that view of the matter, I do not find any good ground to entertain this petition or grant any :5: relief to the petitioners. Hence, criminal petition is hereby rejected.
Sd/-
JUDGE Jm/-