High Court Kerala High Court

B.Sridhar vs P.P.Gangadharan on 11 December, 2009

Kerala High Court
B.Sridhar vs P.P.Gangadharan on 11 December, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 3345 of 2009()


1. B.SRIDHAR, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. P.P.GANGADHARAN, S/O.RAMAN, DRIVER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.N.K.SUBRAMANIAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR

 Dated :11/12/2009

 O R D E R
                M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.
              ===========================
              CRL.M.C.No. 3345    OF 2009
              ===========================

        Dated this the 11th day of December,2009

                         ORDER

Petitioner is the fourth accused in S.T.1837/2008

on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I,

Kannur taken cognizance for an offence under section

138 of Negotiable Instruments Act on Annexure A

complaint filed by the first respondent. This petition

is filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure contending that petitioner is implicated as

accused on the allegation that he is one of the

Directors of the Private Limited Company based on a

dishonoured cheque dated 15.6.2007 when petitioner

had ceased to be a Director of the Company, with

effect from 28.6.2006 and therefore petitioner cannot

be prosecuted for the offence committed by the Company,

after he ceased to be a Director and hence the case

is to be quashed. Petitioner also pointed out that in

Crl.M.C.1039/2009 and connected cases, this court has

already quashed similar proceedings initiated under

section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, finding that

the dishonoured cheques in those cases were also issued

subsequent to 28.6.2006.

Crl.M.C.3345/2009 2

2. Though notice was served on the first respondent

complainant before the trial court, he did not appear.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was

heard.

4. As per Annexure E order in Crl.M.C.1039/2009 and

connected cases, this court has already found that

petitioner had resigned from the Director of the company

with effect from 28.6.2006. Therefore he is not liable or

responsible for the business of the Company subsequent to

28.6.2006. Annexure A complaint shows that the dishonoured

cheque in the case was issued on 15.6.2007. It was

allegedly issued towards discharge of the amount due under

the chitty account as on 11.6.2007. The cheque was

dishonoured on 14.9.2009 and notice under section 138(b)

of Negotiable Instruments Act demanding the amount was also

sent on 9.10.2007. In such circumstances, when the cheque

itself was issued after the petitioner ceased to be a

Director of the Company, he cannot be prosecuted for its

dishonour or failure to pay the amount when demanded.

The continuation of the proceedings, as against the

petitioner, in such circumstance, is only an abuse of

process of court.

Petition is allowed. C.C.1837/2008 on the file of

Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kannur is quashed.




                                          M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
                                                 JUDGE

Crl.M.C.3345/2009    3

tpl/-

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.




   ---------------------
       W.P.(C).NO. /06
   ---------------------


          JUDGMENT




       SEPTEMBER,2006