S. Uma Maheshwari vs M/S Golden Impex
2021 Latest Caselaw 13140 Mad

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 13140 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.5190 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.5190 of 2018
                                                             And
                                               Crl.M.P.Nos.2569 and 2570 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.83 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)


                     1/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                Crl.O.P.No.5190 of 2018



                                                         ORDER

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

the case in C.No.83 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 1 st accused is a Private

Limited Company and the 2nd accused is the Managing Director/Authorized

Signatory of the 1st accused and the 3rd accused is the Additional Director of

the 1st accused. The company is engaged in the manufacturing of hosiery

goods and as per the books of accounts maintained in the regular course of

business by the complainant, the accused has to pay a sum of

Rs.1,62,18,794 to the complainant. The accused No.2 had issued cheques to

the complainant on behalf of accused No.1 and 3. The details of the cheque

is as follows:

S.No. Cheque No. & Date Drawn on Amount 1 001017/24.03.2015 HDFCBank, Kumaran Rs.23,00,000/-

Road, Tirupur 2 001018/24.03.2015 HDFCBank, Kumaran Rs.23,80,003/-

Road, Tirupur Total Rs.46,80,003/-

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.No.5190 of 2018

The complainant also 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.

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.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.No.5190 of 2018

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

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.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ Crl.O.P.No.5190 of 2018

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

records to show that the petitioner is responsible and 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.83 of 2017 on the file of the Fast Track Court at

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

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.83 of 2017 in sofar as the other concerned, within a period of three