1 SNS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.165 OF 2011 Gunvantilal N. Shah & Ors. ...Applicants. v/s. Nectar Life Sciences Ltd.& Anr. ...Respondents. Mr. Neville D. Deboo ,adv. For the Applicants. Mr. S.V. Marwadi, adv. For the Respondent No.1. Smt. M.R.Tidke, APP for the R.No.2/State. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : MAY 5, 2011. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Applicants,who are the accused nos.2, 4 and 5 in criminal case no.92/SS/2011 under Section 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate 63rd Court, Andheri seek process issued against them to be quashed. 2 Perused the contents of the complaint and notice. Admittedly, accused no.1 is the Manav Drugs Private Limited Company of a particular family and the accused nos.2 to 5 are its directors. Accused no.3 is son of the accused no.2. Accused no.4 Hansaben is wife of accused no.2 Gunvantilal and the accused no.5 Trupti is wife of the accused no.3 Bhavesh. Thus, company is run by the family itself. In the 2 complaint, it is mentioned that accused nos.2,3,4 and 5 are directors, authorised signatories and persons in charge and responsible for the day- to-day activities and business, banking and financial affairs of the accused no.1. Though in the complaint in paragraph 6, it is stated that cheques in question were signed by the accused no.3, it is specifically stated at a number of places in the complaint that all the accused nos. 2,3,4 and 5 are also authorised signatories of the complainant. If it is so, they may be held responsible for day-to-day conduct of the business. Whether infact they were responsible and in-charge of the day-to-day business of the company is a question of fact, which can not be decided at this stage. Therefore, at this stage, I am not inclined to interfere in the issuance of process. 3 Therefore, application stands dismissed. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)