bsb IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 420 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 420 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 420 OF 2008 Manohar Bidaye ... Petitioner (Ori.Accused No.5) v/s 1. State of Maharashtra 2. CFL Capital Financial Services Ltd. ... Respondents Mr.S.V.Marwadi i/by S.P.Narkar for the petitioner. Mr.P.A.Pol, A.P.P. for the respondent No.1 State. Mr.V.B.Pandey for the respondent No.2. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: DATED: DATED: 29TH APRIL, 2008 29TH APRIL, 2008 29TH APRIL, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C.: 1. Rule. By consent Rule made returnable forthwith. 2. The only issue involved in the present petition is, whether the proceedings in C.C.No.310/S/2002 pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 12th Court, Bandra, Mumbai are to be quashed as against the petitioner i.e. accused No.5. The learned advocate for the accused No.5 drawn my attention to the fact that there is not a single averment in the complaint involving the accused No.5. The only statement made against the accused No.5 is that, he is a director of the accused No.1 which is a 2 limited Company. 3. As held by the Supreme Court in SMS Pharmaceutical SMS Pharmaceutical SMS Pharmaceutical Co. Co. Co. Ltd. v/s Neeta Bhalla Ltd. v/s Neeta Bhalla Ltd. v/s Neeta Bhalla and by this Court in the case of Shishir B. Desai & anr. v/s Ceat Financial Shishir B. Desai & anr. v/s Ceat Financial Shishir B. Desai & anr. v/s Ceat Financial Services Services Services Ltd. & anr., reported in 2006 ALL MR (Cri) Ltd. & anr., reported in 2006 ALL MR (Cri) Ltd. & anr., reported in 2006 ALL MR (Cri) 2083, 2083, 2083, merely because a person happens to be a director of the Company that would not be a ground for prosecuting him in proceedings filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. There must be some averment indicating complicity of the accused and his involvement in the dishonour of the cheque. 4. No such averment has been made in the complaint as against the accused No.5 and, therefore, the proceedings against him will have to be quashed. 5. The criminal proceedings against the petitioner i.e. accused No.5 in C.C.No.310/S/2002 pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 12th Court, Bandra, Mumbai are quashed and set aside. 6. Writ petition disposed of accordingly.