S. Uma Maheshwari vs M/S Golden Impex
2021 Latest Caselaw 13086 Mad

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 13086 Mad
Judgement Date : 5 July, 2021

Madras High Court

S. Uma Maheshwari vs M/S Golden Impex on 5 July, 2021

                                                                               Crl.O.P.No.5185 of 2018

                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED : 05.07.2021

                                                      CORAM

                                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

                                             Crl.O.P.No.5185 of 2018
                                                      And
                                        Crl.M.P.Nos.2567 and 2568 of 2018

                      S. Uma Maheshwari                                    ... Petitioner

                                                         Vs.

                      M/s Golden Impex
                      represented by its
                      Power of Attorney Holder
                      K.P.K. Balasubramaniam
                      S/o K.P. Krishnan
                      Sri Devi Complex,
                      No.74, Eswaran Koil Street,
                      Tirupur.                                                    ... Respondent


                      Prayer:
                            Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to call for the
                      records pertaining to C.C.No.96 of 2017 on the file of the Fast Track Court
                      at Magisterial Level, Tiruppur and quash the same.

                                  For Petitioner : Mr. K. S. Karthik Raja
                                  For Respondent : Mr. C. Ananda Ramanan
                                                    ( No Appearance)


                      1/4

http://www.judis.nic.in
                                                                                  Crl.O.P.No.5185 of 2018



                                                           ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking to call for the records relating to

the case in C.No.96 of 2017 on the file of the Fast Track Court at

Magisterial Level, Tiruppur and to quash the same.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the respondent/complainant is a

Private Limited Company and the accused had business transactions with

the complainant. In a business transaction the accused has to pay a sum of

Rs.48,17,415/- and he issued two cheques. The details of the cheque is as

follows:

S.No. Cheque No. & Date Drawn on Amount 1 001015/24.03.2015 HDFCBank, Kumaran Rs.24,00,000/-

Road, Tirupur 2 001016/24.03.2015 HDFCBank, Kumaran Rs.24,17,415 Road, Tirupur Total Rs.48,17,415/-

When the complainant deposited the above mentioned cheques for collection

through his bank and the same was returned with an endorsement “ Funds

Insufficient”, which lead to the filing of the present complaint.

http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.O.P.No.5185 of 2018

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is

not an Additional Director of the said company and she is only a share

holder of the company and the complaint itself is not maintainable as no

offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is made out

and hence the complaint is liable to be quashed. The learned counsel relied

on the decision the Judgment reported in 2018 SCC Online Madras

3522(2019) 1 MWN(Crl) DCC 1 in Crl.O.P.Nos. 3389 and 3390 of 2018

and Crl.M.P.Nos.9468,9469,1480to 1483 of 2019.

4. Heard the learned counsel on either side.

5. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that in the present

case the stand of the petitioner that he is only a share holder and no action

can be taken against her is not sustainable.

6. In the Judgment reported in 2018 SCC Online Madras 3522(2019)

1 MWN(Crl) DCC 1 in Crl.O.P.Nos. 3389 and 3390 of 2018 and

Crl.M.P.Nos.9468,9469,1480 to 1483 of 2019 the relevant portion of the

http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.O.P.No.5185 of 2018

order in para No.3 it is held as follows:

The petitioners are only investor Directors/Non- Executive Directors and even as per the Articles of Association of the 1st accused company, such investor Directors are not incharge of or responsible for the day- today management of the company and they will not be liable for the any default or failure of the company.

The complaint does not contain sufficient allegations against these petitioners and it does not satisfy the requirements under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

7. On perusal of the records produced before this Court there is no

records to show that the petitioner has involved day to day affairs of the

Company and the Judgment produced by the learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner squarely applies to the present case.

8. In view of the fact that the petitioner is only an investor, the

proceedings in C.C.No.96 of 2017 on the file of the Fast Track Court at

Magisterial Level, Tiruppur is hereby quashed with regard to the petitioner

http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.O.P.No.5185 of 2018

alone.

9. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is allowed and there

shall be a direction to the Court below to complete the proceedings in

C.C.No.96 of 2017 in sofar as the other concerned, within a period of three