Babanrao Bhikaji Pachpute And Anr vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2023 Latest Caselaw 9305 Bom

   Gokhale                            1 of 3                            24-wp-2942-23


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

               CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2942 OF 2023

 Babanrao Bhikaji Pachpute & Anr.                ..Petitioners
       Versus
 State of Maharashtra & Anr.                     ..Respondents
                               __________
 Mr. Shamsher Garud a/w. Santosh Avhad i/b. Jayakar and Partners
 for Petitioners.
 Mr. A. R. Patil, APP for State/Respondent No.1.
                               __________
                          CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
                          DATE : 5 SEPTEMBER 2023
 PC :

 1.            The Petitioners were the original accused Nos.1 and 2 in

 S.T.C.No.421 of 2014 before the J.M.F.C., Madha. The learned

 Magistrate vide his order dated 13.11.2014 issued process U/s.138

 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the Petitioners. The

 Petitioner No.1 was described as the Chairman of Shri Saikrupa

 Sugar and Allied Industries Limited. The Petitioner No.2 was

 described as it's Managing Director. Significantly, the said company

 i.e. Shri Saikrupa Sugar and Allied Industries Limited was not

 arraigned as an accused in the complaint. The Petitioners

 challenged the order of issuance of process before the Additional

 Sessions Judge, Barshi vide Criminal Revision Application No.1 of




::: Uploaded on - 06/09/2023                   ::: Downloaded on - 07/09/2023 05:10:01 :::
                                          2 of 3                            24-wp-2942-23


 2023. That application is rejected vide order dated 04.07.2023 and

 hence, the petitioners have approached this Court.


 2.             Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that

 process is issued U/s.138 of the N.I.Act. The cheque in question

 was issued on behalf of the aforementioned company. Therefore, it

 was not permissible to launch the prosecution against the

 petitioners without making the company as an accused. He relied

 on the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

 Anieeta Hada Versus Godfather Travels and Tours Private Limited 1

 in support of his contention.


 3.             Considering these submissions, it is necessary to hear the

 other side. Learned counsel for the petitioners has made out a case

 for grant of ad-interim relief.


 4.             Hence, the following order:


                                              ORDER

i) Issue Notice to the Respondents, returnable on 05.12.2023.

 1    (2012) 5 Supreme Court Cases 661





                                            3 of 3                            24-wp-2942-23

ii) Stand over to 05.12.2023.

iii) Till then, there shall be ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (c).

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)