Y. Sharma vs M/S. Surya Fincap Limited
2001 Latest Caselaw 909 Del

ORDER

K.S. Gupta, J.

1. Petitioner filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the complaint bearing No. 396/97 - M/s. Surya Fincap Ltd vs. Ganga Automobiles Ltd and other and proceedings taken there under pending before a Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi.

2. Complaint under section 138 read with section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act') was filed by M/s. Surya Fincap Ltd against the petitioner and 5 others, interalia, alleging that towards the discharge of debt/loan the accused-persons issued cheque Nos. 087140 for Rs. 15 lakhs and 087142 for Rs. 23,100/-, both dated 17th November 1996 drawn on Corporation Bank, Industrial Finance Branch, New Delhi. On presentation both these cheques were dishonoured on the ground - "Exceeded Arrangement". Thereafter demand for payment of the amount covered by cheque No. 087140 was made through the notice dated 7th January 1997 while covered by cheque No. 087142 through notice dated 8th January 1997. However, despite service of both the notices through registered AD post the accused failed to make payment of the said cheques within 15 days of the receipt of notices. By the order dated 5th February 1997 the petitioner-accused had been summoned to face trial for the offence under Section 138 of the Act.

3. Only submission advanced by Sh. Siddarth Luthra for petitioner was that in respect of two cheques based on two different demand notices single complaint could not have been filed by the respondent. Submission is, however, without any merit. Under Section 219 Cr.P.C. when a person is accused of more offences than one of the same type committed within the space of 12 months from the first to the last of said offences, he may be charged with the tried at one trial for any number of them not exceeding three. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is accused of the same type of offence under Section 138 of the Act in respect of both the aforesaid cheques and cause of action accrued to the respondent with a gap of only one day as a result of non-payment of amount of both the cheques by the petitioner. Later cheque was issued towards interest on the principle amount covered by the former cheque. The idea behind said Section 219 Cr.P.C. is to check multiplicity of proceedings in criminal matter. Jointer of cause of action is permissible under Order II Rule 3 CPC in civil cases also. In my view, on said facts single complaint for both the cheques is legally maintainable. Petition is, therefore, dismissed being without merit.