Gujarat High Court
Amol Chandrakant Pawar vs State Of Gujarat on 13 January, 2023
Bench: Nirzar S. Desai
R/SCR.A/6102/2019 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 6102 of 2019
With
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 6266 of 2019
With
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 6260 of 2019
==========================================================
AMOL CHANDRAKANT PAWAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR P P MAJMUDAR(5284) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MS. MAITHILI MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
ROHAN A SHAH(7497) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
RUSHABH H SHAH(7594) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 13/01/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. These three petitions are preferred by the same
petitioners in respect of three different complaints under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act filed by
respondent No.2 in each of the petitions, respondent No.2
being M/s. Vilas Transcore Ltd.
2. The Special Civil Application No. 6102/2019 is
preferred with a prayer to quash and set-aside the
Criminal Complaint being Criminal Case No. 40886 of
2017 pending before the learned 2nd Additional Civil
R/SCR.A/6102/2019 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2023
Judge and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Vadodara as
well as the order dated 23.12.2017 passed by the learned
2nd Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, First
Class, Vadodara below Exh-1 in Criminal Case No. 40886
of 2017.
3. Another Special Civil Application No. 6266/2019 is
preferred with a prayer to quash and set-aside the
Criminal Complaint being Criminal Case No. 40884 of
2017 pending before the learned 2nd Additional Civil
Judge and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Vadodara as
well as the order dated 23.12.2017 passed by the learned
2nd Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, First
Class, Vadodara below Exh-1 in Criminal Case No. 40884
of 2017.
4. The Special Civil Application No. 6260/2019 is
preferred with a prayer to quash and set-aside the
Criminal Complaint being Criminal Case No. 40885 of
2017 pending before the learned 2nd Additional Civil
Judge and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Vadodara as
R/SCR.A/6102/2019 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2023
well as the order dated 23.12.2017 passed by the learned
2nd Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, First
Class, Vadodara below Exh-1 in Criminal Case No. 40885
of 2017.
5. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioners are
Non-executing Directors of Aditya Vidhyut Appliances
Ltd., who is accused No.1 in all the three complaints,
pending before the competent Court, Vadodara under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and the
Company wherein the present petitioners are Non-
executing Directors is a Company engaged in business of
manufacturing and repairing transformers. Some
business transactions between the Directors took place
and pursuant to the transactions, the Company wherein
the petitioners are Non-executive Directors, issued
certain cheques, the details of which are as under:
Sr. No. Cheque No. Date Amount
(Rs)
1. 106077 25.8.2017 7331169.00
2. 106078 30.10.2017 11096899.00
3. 106079 20.10.2017 14177928.00
R/SCR.A/6102/2019 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2023
4. 106080 20.10.2017 15880862.00
Total 48486858.00
6. Since cheques bearing Nos. 106078, 106079 and
106080 were returned, the complainant preferred three
different complaints being Criminal Case Nos. 40886 of
2017, 40884 of 2017 and 40885 of 2017, against M/s.
Aditya Vidyut Appliances Ltd. and its Directors before the
Court of learned 2nd Additional Civil Judge and Judicial
Magistrate, First Class, Vadodara.
7. As the petitioners are Non-executing Directors, they
have preferred these Applications for quashing on the
ground that the present petitioners are Non-executing
Directors and they have nothing to do with day-to-day
operations of the Company and they are not at all
involved in any financial matters of the Company and,
therefore, the complaints qua them is required to be
quashed.
8. Heard learned advocate Mr. P.P. Majumdar for the
petitioners, learned advocate Mr. Rushabh Shah for the
R/SCR.A/6102/2019 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2023
complainant Company and learned APP Ms. Maithili
Mehta for the State in all the three matters.
9. Learned advocate Mr. P.P. Majmudar submitted that
the present petitioners being Non-executive Directors,
they are not involved in day-to-day operations of the
Company nor in any financial transactions of the
Company and, therefore, they have wrongly been
implicated by way of filing Complaints under Section 138
of the Negotiable Instruments Act and, therefore, the
complaints qua them are required to be quashed and set-
aside.
10. Learned advocate Mr. Rushabh Shah, upon
instruction, there is no dispute with regard to aforesaid
aspect and states that since the present petitioners are
Non-executive Directors and not connected with the day-
to-day affairs of the Company and its operation and
financial matters, the complainant does not have any
objections if the complaints against them in respect of all
three cases are quashed, however, the Court may clarify
R/SCR.A/6102/2019 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2023
that the trial Court may go on with the trial in respect of
other accused in respect of the Criminal Case Nos. 40886
of 2017, 40884 of 2017 and 40885 of 2017.
11. Considering the fact that it is not disputed that
present petitioners are Non-executive Directors and the is
not disputed by learned advocate Mr. Shah for the
complainant and as also considering Section 141 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, which also provides that If
the person committing an offence under section 138 is a
company, every person who, at the time the offence was
committed, was in charge of, and was responsible to, the
company for the conduct of the business of the company,
as well as the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of
the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against
and punished accordingly.
12. In the instant case, since the present petitioners are
Non-executive Directors and are not responsible for day-
to-day affairs of the Company, considering Section 141 of
R/SCR.A/6102/2019 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2023
the Negotiable Instruments Act, as also considering the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Pooja
Ravinder Devidasani v. State of Maharashtra, reported in
(2014) 16 SCC 1, wherein in Para-19, it is held that a
Director of a company ia liable to be convicted for an
offence committed by the Company if he/she was in
charge of and was responsible to the company for the
conduct of its business or if it proved that the offence was
committed with the consent or connivance of, or was
attributed to any negligence on the part of the Director
concerned.
13. In the instant case, as the complainant Company
itself has not disputed the fact that the present
petitioners are Non-executive Directors and they are not
responsible for day-to-day affairs of the Company and in
no way connected with the affairs of the Company and,
therefore, in view of Section 141 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act as well as in view of the judgment of
Supreme Court in case of Pooja Ravinder Devidasani v.
R/SCR.A/6102/2019 ORDER DATED: 13/01/2023
State of Maharashtra (supra), all the three complaints
being Criminal Case Nos. 40886 of 2017, 40884 of 2017
and 40885 of 2017 pending before the learned 2nd
Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, First Class,
Vadodara as well as the order dated 23.12.2017 passed
by the learned 2nd Additional Civil Judge and Judicial
Magistrate, First Class, Vadodara below Exh-1, in all the
three Criminal Cases as mentioned above, are quashed
and set-aside, qua the present petitioners only and
accordingly the same are quashed and set-aside.
14. It is clarified that these complaints are filed only in
respect of the present petitioners and trial Court is at
liberty to proceed with the complaints in respect of rest
of the accused.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)
SAJ GEORGE
