M/S.Ramraj Industries vs P.Suresh Babu
2021 Latest Caselaw 18388 Mad

                                                                            Crl.O.P.Nos.14322 of 2018

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  DATED : 08.09.2021

                                                       CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

                                             Crl.O.P.No.14322 of 2018
                                            and Crl.M.P.No.7241 of 2018


                     1.M/s.Ramraj Industries,
                       Rep. by its Partners,
                       Kilmurugai Village,
                       Ambur, Vellore District.

                     2.P.Mangaiyarthilagam,
                       Partner of M/s.Ramraj Industries

                     3.P.Rajasekar,
                       Partner of M/s.Ramraj Industries

                     4.P.Ram Kumar,
                       Partner of M/s.Ramraj Industries                      .. Petitioners

                                                          Vs.

                     P.Suresh Babu                                           .. Respondent

                     Prayer: Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of
                     Criminal Procedure, to call for the records of S.T.C.No.152 of 2018 pending
                     on the file of the Additional District cum Judicial Magistrate, Ambur,
                     Vellore District and quash the same.



                     1/1


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                               Crl.O.P.Nos.14322 of 2018



                                    For Petitioners   : Mr.S.P.Arthi

                                    For Respondent    : Ms.S.Thamizharasi

                                                        ORDER

This petition has been filed to call for the records in

S.T.C.No.152 of 2018, pending on the file of the Additional District cum

Judicial Magistrate, Ambur, Vellore District and quash the same.

2. The case of the prosecution is that A1 is a Company, A2 to A4

are the partners of the said Company. The accused Company is involved in

manufacturing activities in leather. The 3rd petitioner was a close friend of

the complainant and petitioners 2, 3 and 4 were co trustee in Prem

Educational Trust with the complainant. Taking advantage of the friendship

with the complainant and his family, the accused have borrowed

Rs.45,00,00/- as hand loan in cash on various dates from the complainant to

meet out the business needs of the 1st petitioner Company and assured to

repay the amount within a short span of time. Thereafter, after several

demands made by the complainant, the petitioners have issued cheque for

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.Nos.14322 of 2018

Rs.45 lakhs dated 17.02.2018, to discharge their liability. However, the said

cheque was returned with endorsement ''Refer to Drawer'' and the same was

informed to the complainant. The complainant had sent legal notice to the

accused on 12.03.2018, and in turn, the accused also issued reply to the said

legal notice and since no valid reasons for non payment of dues was

assigned, the complaint was filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act against the petitioners in S.T.C.No.152 of 2018, on the file

of the Additional District cum Judicial Magistrate, Ambur, Vellore District.

Challenging the same present petition is filed.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted

that the 1st petitioner is a Partnership Firm and the petitioners 2 to 4 are its

partners and all are family members. The entire business administration is

solely taken care by the 3rd petitioner herein and petitioners 2 and 4 are not

interfering with the affairs of the Company. It is submitted by the learned

counsel appearing for the petitioner that the true fact is that the 3rd petitioner

and the respondent were trustees in a private trust, which was started by the

3rd petitioner. The 3rd petitioner was removed from the above said trust on

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.Nos.14322 of 2018

fictitious and false allegations and the same has been challenged by the 3rd

petitioner before the appropriate forum. The 3rd petitioner is doing various

businesses including running a School and is in the habit of travelling both

within and outside India and used to hand over signed cheques to the school

management authorities and it appears that one such cheque had been

misused by the respondent herein. He further made a submission that the 3rd

petitioner, only upon receipt of the notice from the respondent, came to

know about the misuse of the cheque. The petitioners having not borrowed

any amount from the respondent, they are not liable to repay any sum to the

respondent. The respondent with an ulterior motive to harass the petitioners,

has hurriedly initiated the 138 proceedings with false claims and untrue

allegations and misusing the judicial forum. Even the complaint lodged

against the petitioner is also very vague, which does not disclose any details

with regard to the borrowed sums on various dates.

4. It is further submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners that the entire transactions were between the 3rd petitioner and

the respondent. The petitioners 2 and 4 have no role to play in the above

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.Nos.14322 of 2018

said proceedings and therefore, the 138 proceedings against the petitioners 2

and 4 are not sustainable and further on instructions, he submitted that the

petitioners 1 and 3 are ready to face the trial and therefore, this Court may

issue a direction to the Trial Court to expedite the trial and complete the

same as early as possible and furthermore, the appearance of the petitioners

before the Trial Court may be dispensed with. Hence prays for allowing of

these petitions against petitioners 2 and 4.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent fairly

conceded for quashing the complaint in respect of petitioners 2 and 4 and

opposed to grant relief to the petitioners 1 and 3, as they are responsible for

all business related transactions and directly involved into the affairs of the

Company.

6. This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions and

also perused the available materials, particularly, the private complaint

lodged by the respondent.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.Nos.14322 of 2018

7. Though various allegations are made against the petitioners, it

is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners 2 and 4 were not involved in

any business transactions. Further it is the claim of the petitioners that they

are not liable to repay any sums so claimed by the respondent, as they have

not borrowed any amount.

8. Further without any details as to how the petitioners 2 and 4

herein, in their capacity as partners were responsible for the issuance of the

cheques, implicating the petitioners 2 and 4 for the offence under Section

138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is not justifiable. Further, the said

fact has also been fairly conceded by the respondent. Hence this Court is

inclined to quash the complaints against the petitioners 2 and 4. Insofar as

the petitioners 1 and 3 are concerned, on the submission made by the

learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions, that the petitioners 1 and

3 are ready to face the trial and further the 3 rd respondent himself admitted

that he placed orders for purchase of the above said raw materials and

reiterates that the entire business activities and its related transactions were

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.Nos.14322 of 2018

solely dealt with by him, this Court is of the opinion that he shall face trial

before the Trial Court. It is left open to the petitioners 1 and 3 to raise all the

contentions before the Trial Court and the same shall be considered on its

own merits and in accordance with law.

9. For the reasons aforesaid, this Criminal Original Petition is

allowed insofar as petitioners 2 and 4 are concerned and S.T.C.No.152 of

2018, pending on the file of the Additional District cum Judicial Magistrate,

Ambur, Vellore District, is quashed insofar as petitioners 2 and 4.

10. In respect of petitioners 1 and 3, these petitions are disposed

of directing the trial court to dispose of S.T.C.No.152 of 2018, as

expeditiously as possible as per seniority of the case. The petitioners and

respondent are directed to co-operate with the trial court for the early

completion of trial. Further, taking into consideration the request as made

by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the appearance of petitioners 1

and 3 before the trial court is dispensed with except for their appearance for

the purpose of receiving the copy of the proceedings u/s 207 Cr.P.C.,

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.Nos.14322 of 2018

framing of charges, questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and on the day

on which judgment is to be pronounced. However, if for any particular

reason, the presence of the petitioners is necessary, the trial court, at its

wisdom, shall direct their appearance on those days.

08.09.2021

Speaking/Non Speaking order Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No

sk

To

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Ranipet, Vellore District.

2. The Additional District cum Judicial Magistrate, Ambur, Vellore District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.Nos.14322 of 2018

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

Sk

Crl.O.P.No.14322 of 2018

08.09.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis