IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUiT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIST HE 26 DAY OF MAY 2011 B E F ( i RE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE A.S.PACHHAPLRE CRIMINAL PETITION Nos. 10362.10363 and 10364/2011 CrLP.10362/2011 BETWEEN: Sri. Saveed Kararnatulluh S/o. Late S. Abdul Shukur. Age: 55 years. 0cc: Chairman and Managing Director. C. F. Foods Private Ltd., Plot No. 15/A, KIADB industrial Area, S a n k a 1 p u r, Beilary Road, Hospeth, Dist: Bellary. ... PETITIONER [By Sri,Srikant T. Patil, ADV.,) AND: Shri. K. Fazalulla S/o. Late H.K. Abdul Khadarsab, Age: 54 years, 0cc: Business. R / o. Old I ron Merchant, Behind Saras\vati Taikies, H o S pet h. Dist: Bellarv. ... RESPONDENT This Criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking that the proceedings initiated in C.C.No.2668/2010 and process issued on 09.08.2010 by the Prl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) & JMFC Court Hospet and registering case in C.C.No. 2668 /2010 be quashed against the petitioners and issue direction to the court below to drop the proceedings in C.C. No. 2668/2010 as against the present petitioners. CrI.P.10363/20l I BETWEEN: Sri. Sayeed Karamatulluh S/o. Late S. Abdul Shukur, Age: 55 years, 0cc: Chairman and Managing Director. C.F. foods Private Ltd., Plot No.15/A, KIADB Industrial Area, Sankalpur, Bellary Road. 1-lospeth, 01st: Bcllary. ... PETITIONER jBy Sri.Srikant T. Patil, ADV.,) AND: Shri. K. Khaleelullah S/o. Late H.K. Abdul Khadarsab, Age: 56 years. 0cc: Business, R/o. Old Iron Merchant, Behind Saraswati Talkies, Hospeth. Dist: Bellary, Represented by his Special Power of Attorney Holder, K. Fazlullah. ... RESPONDENT This Criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking that the proceedings initiated in C.C.No.1335/20l0 and process issued on 26.07.2010 by the Prl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) & JMFC 3 Court Hospet and registering case in C.C.No.1335/2010 be quashed against the petitioners and issue direction to the court below to drop the proceedings in C.C. No.1335/2010 as against the present petitioners. Crl.P.10364/201 I BETWEEN: Sri. Sayeed Karamatulluh Sb. Late S. Abdul Shukur, Age: 55 years, 0cc: Chairman and Managing Director, C.F. foods Private Ltd., Plot No.15/A, KIADB Industrial Area, Sankalpur, Bellary Road, Hospeth, Dist: Bellary. ... PETITIONER By Sri.Srikant T. Patil, ADV.,) AND: Shri. K. Athaullah S/o. Late H.K. Abdul Khadarsab, Age: 50 years, 0cc: Business, R/o. Old Iron Merchant, Behind Saraswati Talkies, Hospeth, Dist: Bellary, ... RESPONDENT This Criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking that the proceedings initiated in C.C.No.3275/2010 and process issued on 01.10.2010 by the Pri. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.J & JMFC Court Hospet and registering case in C.C.No.3275/20l0 be quashed against the petitioners and issue direction to the court below to drop the proceedings in C.C. No.3275/2010 as against the present petitioners. 1 4 These petitions coming on for admission this day. the court made the following: ORDER The facts reveal that the petitioner herein is the Managing Director of the company. He issued the cheques to the respondents herein towards the payment of share amount to them and on presentation of the said cheques for encashment. the respondents were informed that the payment has been stopped by the drawer and in the circumstances, the respondents issued a demand notice and as the same was not complied, they approached the court below with a complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. for taking action for the offence under Sections 138 and 142 of Negotiable Instrument Act ( hereinafter called as Act for short) 2. The learned Magistrate in pursuance of the complaint filed, recorded the sworn statement and took cognizance under the impugned order. The petitioner who is the Managing Director of the Company has filed this petition challenging the order of taking cognizance on the ground that, under the 5 provisions of Section 398 of the Indian Companies Act, the respondents have to approach the Company Law Board and the complaint cannot be maintained before the Magistrate under Section 138 of N.I. Act. 3. In this context I have heard the learned counsel for both parties. 4. As could be seen from the provisions of Section 398 of the Indian Companies Act, though the Act has been amended, the date from which it came into force is yet to be notified. There is no constitution of Company Law Board in pursuance of the said amendment, till today. In the circumstances, the respondents cannot be compelled to approach the company Law Board. 5. So far as, the action sought to be taken against the petitioners by the respondent is concerned, is in respect of offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act, it is the Magistrate who has got authority to .entertain the complaint against the petitioner and in case, if complaint is against the company. Section 141 of the N.I. Act provides that, in case 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 . .‘ 6 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. So in the circumstances, when the petitioners have issued the cheques and cheques were not encashed, demand notice has been issued and as the notice was not complied. Complaint came to be filed by the respondents against the accused-petitioner under Section 138 of the N.l. Act and the Magistrate is competent to entertain the complaint. 6. The perusal of the complaint reveals that, Managing Director of the Company has been implicated as the accused in this case. So the company is represented by the Chairman and Managing Director in their capacity, the petitioner has been arrayed as the accused. In the circumstances, I do not think that there is non-compliance of provisions of Section 141 of the Act. So taking into consideration all these circumstances, I am of the opinion that there is no merit in these petitions and accordingly they are dismissed. Sdf- JUDGE Rms/