ASHIM KUMAR ROY, J. - (1.) THE petitioner has come up before this court by filing aforesaid two criminal revisions for quashing of two cases being complaint case no. 1518 of 2013 and 1519 of 2013 both pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 8th Court, Alipore relating to the offences punishable under section 138/141 of the N.I. Act on the ground much before the issuance of the cheque he resigned from the post of the Director of the said company by submitting Form 32 before the Registrar of Companies and on the ground that the allegations on which the complaint has been filed against him with the aid of section 141 of the N.I. Act are insufficient.
(2.) SINCE the parties are same and quashing has been sought for on identical ground both the aforesaid criminal revisions were taken up for hearing together and are now disposed of by this common order. In support of their contention the learned Advocate of the petitioner at the very outset drew the attention of the court to the certified copy of Form 32 and submitted that he resigned from the post of Directorship with effect from December 1, 2012 and Form 32 was duly submitted on May 20, 2013 but the cheques in question were issued on December 27, 2012 much after his resignation. In this regard reliance has been placed on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Anita Malhotra versus Apparel Export Promotion Council & Anr. reported in (2012) 1 SCC 520. Besides that in support of his contention that there was no sufficient allegation against the petitioner to put vicarious liability on him, he first drew my attention to the allegations made in 3 and 4 of the petition of complaint and then relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court, in the case of SMS Pharmaceuticals versus Neeta Bhalla & Anr. reported in (2005) 8 SCC 89 and National Small Industries Corporation Ltd. Versus Harmeet Singh Paintal & Anr. reported in (2010) 3 SCC 330 (Civil) 677. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the opposite party while has not disputed the contention of the learned advocate of the petitioner that the petitioner resigned from the post of Directorship before the date of issuance of the cheque but was not able to improve his case on the point that there was insufficient allegations so as to prosecute the petitioner with the aid of section 141 of the N.I. Act. Having regard to the background as above, I have no doubt the impugned proceeding against the petitioner is not tenable and is quashed.
(3.) CRIMINAL section is directed to communicate this order to the court below. Urgent xerox certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.;