Sutanu Biswas vs M/S. Hinduja Leyland Finance ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2705 Cal

 D/L39                               C.R.R. No.1731 of 2021
19.04.2023

With Bpg.

CRAN 5 of 2022

In Re: An application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973;

Sutanu Biswas Versus M/s. Hinduja Leyland Finance Limited and another

Mr. Anindya Bose, Mr. Asok Banerjee, Mr. Diptendu Mandal, Mr. Mridul Biswas.

...for the petitioner.

Mr. Abhra Mukherejee, Ms. Manisha Sharma.

...for the State.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner challenges

the continuance of the proceedings in C.S. No.0038229 of 2015

under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act pending in the

court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 18th Court, Calcutta.

Learned advocate submits that the complainant is the

company and the person who was representing the company did not

aver in the petition of complaint that he has personal knowledge

regarding the transactions for which the cheque was issued. To that

extent, learned advocate relies upon the decision in A.C. Narayanan

Vs. State of Maharashtra and another reported in (2014) 11 SCC

790. Emphasis has been laid on the issue that if a complaint is filed

by a person who does not have personal knowledge regarding the

case, then in that case the proceedings under Section 138 of the

Negotiable Instruments Act is not maintainable.

I have considered the judgment and the stage at which

the application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

has been filed before this Court. I have considered the contentions

and/or averments made in the petition of complaint.

It has been averred that the complaint has been filed by

the Constituted Attorney, namely, one Monodip Dasgupta. The ratio

of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court did not lay down that

an application is barred in case it is filed by a person who does not

have personal knowledge regarding the case when he is

representing the company.

Different circumstances may arise at the time of trial

when the complainant may be substituted or an appropriate person

may be placed on the dock for deposing who has personal

knowledge regarding the issues which gave rise to the proceedings

under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

The stage at which the petitioner has approached this

Court is a premature stage. Petitioner would be at liberty to assail

the point canvassed at the appropriate stage of the proceedings and

at the stage of final arguments of the case. No interference is called

for at this stage.

With the aforesaid observations, CRR 1731 of 2021 is

disposed of.

Pending application, if any, is consequently disposed of.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly

downloaded from the official website of this Court.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied

for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite

formalities.

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)