SMT. VIMLA DEVI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Anurag Shukla learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri N.K. Seth, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Sachin Garg.

(2.) Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C , 1973for quashing of the proceedings of the Complaint Case No. 866 of 2005, Indo Gulf Fertilizers Limited v. M/s Vinod Kumar and Company under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act pending before court of Special Judicial Magistrate (Pollution) Lucknow and also the orders dated 23.11.2007 and 15.12.2005 as contained in Annexures 9 and 7 of the petition.

(3.) A complaint under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act was filed by the opposite party No. 2 Indo Gulf Fertilizers Limited, a public limited company, through its authorized representative Shri K.K. Jindal, Manager (Marketing Accounts) of the company. It is alleged that the accused No. 2 to 4, i.e., Vivek Kumar (non-petitioner), Vimla Devi (petitioner No. 1), Munni Devi (petitioner No. 2) are carrying on business in partnership under the firm name and style M/s. Vinod Kumar and Company (accused No. 1) having its registered office at Farrukhabad. On the request of the accused persons opposite party No. 2 appointed accused No. 2 to 4 as wholesale dealer in their partnership firm M/s. Vinod Kumar and company for the sale of Fertilizers under the brand name of SHAKTIMAN for the Tehsil Kannauj District Farrukhabad. Accused No. 2 to 4 through their firm M/s Vinod Kumar and Company requested the opposite party No. 2 to supply the stock of fertilizers measuring about 1819.450 metric tons amounting to Rs. 90,10,374/- and after adjusting all the payments and other expenses an amount of Rs. 5,35,621.67 became overdue upon the firm. Accused No. 2 to 4 through their firm accused No. 1 issued a cheque No. 929974 from Account No. 2009 in Bank of India, Farrukhabad Branch for an amount of Rs. 535621.16. Cheque was duly presented by the complainant opposite party No. 2 on 12.8.2005 with its banker State Bank of India, Jawahar Bhawan Branch, Lucknow which was dishonoured by the Bank vide memo dated 18.8.2005 on the ground 'exceed arrangement'. Cheque was returned with memo on 25.8.2005. A notice dated 8.9.2005 was sent to the accused which was duly served upon them on or about 20.9.2005 but they neither replied the notice nor complied the notice nor made any payment, rather sent a reply dated 22.9.2005 through counsel. Thereafter a complaint under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act was filed by the complainant.