Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT.PRABHA RAMESH BABU versus SRI.V.T.KALESH, S/O.THANKAPPAN

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


SMT.PRABHA RAMESH BABU v. SRI.V.T.KALESH, S/O.THANKAPPAN - Crl MC No. 991 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 9661 (6 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 991 of 2007()

1. SMT.PRABHA RAMESH BABU,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. SRI.V.T.KALESH, S/O.THANKAPPAN,
... Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

For Petitioner :SRI.JOY THATTIL ITTOOP

For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :06/06/2007

O R D E R

R.BASANT, J

Crl.M.C.Nos.991 & 1000 of 2007

Dated this the 6th day of June, 2007

ORDER

Petitioner is the 3rd accused in two prosecutions, both under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and initiated by the 1st respondent/complainant. In the cause title, the 1st accused is shown to be a partnership firm represented by its Managing Partner. The 2nd accused is the Managing Partner and the 3rd accused is described to be a partner of the 1st accused. In the body of the complaint, there is nothing to show that the petitioner, the 3rd accused has anything to do with the 1st accused firm. Of course, in para.4, there is an identical averment in both the complaints that the lawyer notice was sent to the accused including the 3rd accused and the 3rd accused had sent a reply raising untenable contentions. The reply notice has been placed before the Court for perusal. It clearly shows that a contention was raised that the petitioner has neither any charge of the firm nor was she in any way responsible for the conduct of the business of the firm.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the dictum in S.M.S Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Neeta Bhalla [2005(8) SCC 89]. The said decision by the apex Court is authority of the proposition that it is incumbent on the complainant to make appropriate averments to attract culpability with the aid of Section 141 of the N.I Act. If the Crl.M.C.Nos.991 & 1000 of 2007 2 complainant has such a case, it has got to be averred specifically that the accused is in charge of and responsible to the company for the conduct of its affairs. Such a crucial assertion having not been made in either of the two complaints, certainly I am in agreement with the learned counsel for the petitioner, the 3rd accused that the prosecution against the 3rd accused, a woman is untenable and is liable to be quashed.

3. In the result, these Crl.M.Cs are, allowed. C.C.Nos.1021 of 2004 and 1048 of 2004 - both pending before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II, Kochi are hereby quashed. Needless to say that the prosecutions in so far as it relates to the co-accused shall continue.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

rtr/ Crl.M.C.Nos.991 & 1000 of 2007 3

R.BASANT, J

Crl.M.C.Nos.991 & 1000 of 2007

Dated this the 28th day of March, 2007

ORDER

Heard. Admitted. Issue notice to the 1st respondent/complainant by speed post with acknowledgment due. Simultaneously give notice to the learned counsel for the 1st respondent/complainant, who is appearing before the court below and file a memo to that effect in 10 days.

2. Call on 24.05.2007. Crl.M.C.Nos.991 & 1000 of 2007 4 Crl.M.Appln.Nos.1654 & 1670 of 2007 There shall be an interim stay as prayed for till 24.05.2007.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.