HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.2886 OF 2008 DATE: 09-09-2011 BETWEEN: Nagarjuna Finance Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director S. Chari, Regd. Office 1-2-599/600, 103, Reliance Mansion, Near Kattamaisamma Temple, Lower Tank Bund Road, Hyderabad and another. - - - Petitioners/ A-1 & A-2. AND Segu Sreenivasulu and The State of A.P., Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. - - - Respondents/ Complainant. This Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.2886 OF 2008 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and A-2 (For short, ‘A-1 and A-2’) under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash proceedings in Calender Case No.619 of 2004, pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nandyal, Kurnool District. 2. Whereas the Petitioners are A-1 and A-2, the Respondent No. 1 is the Complainant in the Calender Case. For the sake of convenience, I refer the parties as arrayed in the Calender Case. 3. The complainant filed private complaint before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Nandya, Kurnool District for the offences punishable under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, ‘the Act’) alleging that he deposited Rs.10,000/- on 18-01-1997 and again Rs.20,000/- on 10-05-1997 under two separate deposit receipt Nos.C450 800075 and C451 00002404 for a period of 45 months each, subject to payment of interest at the rate of 20.31% p.a. and the said deposits were matured by 18-10-2000 and 10-02-2001 respectively, whereas the total matured amount came to Rs.60,000/-, but A-1 Company represented by A-2 who is the Managing Director of A-1 company and also in charge of its affairs failed to pay the matured amounts as required in spite of repeated demands by the complainant and later A-3 and A-4 in the case, being the Executive In charge and Manager of A-1 Company and on the instructions of A-2 issued two cheques in favour of the complainant bearing Nos.838729, dated 27-09-2004 for Rs.10,000 and 838731, dated 29-09-2004 for Rs.20,000/- of H.D.F.C. Bank, Hyderabad towards part payment of the total matured amount of Rs.60,000/- and on 04-10-2004 when he presented the said cheques for collection through the State Bank of India, Noonepalli Branch, Nandyal they were bounced with an endorsement “Insufficient funds” in the account of A-1 Company and the said information was received by the Complainant on 16-10-2004 and consequently the Complainant got issued legal notice to the Accused on 01-11-2004 for necessary compliance but the amounts were not paid, following which he filed the complaint. 4. It is the contention of learned counsel for A-1 and A-2 that A-2 resigned from the Company with effect from 31-01-2001 and as such he submitted Form-32 to the Registrar of Companies informing about his resignation and therefore it cannot be said that he was in charge and responsible for the affairs of A-1 Company thereafter and in support of which contention, he has filed relevant documents before the Court including certified copy of Form-32 which is to the same effect. It is further contended that A-3 and A-4 being the Executive In charge and Manager of A-1 Company who issued the cheques to the Complainant have to explain under what circumstances they were issued to the Complainant and hence it is a fit case to quash the proceedings in so far as A-2 is concerned. 5. After going through the record, it is very clear that by 31-01- 2001 itself A-2 resigned his post whereas there is no dispute about it from the Complainant. Therefore, it cannot be said that he was in charge of the affairs of the Company when the alleged cheques in question were issued by A-3 and A-4 on behalf of A-1 Company. Accordingly, the proceedings are liable to be quashed in so far as A-2 is concerned. So far as A-1 is concerned, because on behalf of it the cheques were issued to the Complainant by A-3 and A-4, which were subsequently dishonoured, it is liable to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 138 and 142 of the N.I. Act. For the foregoing reasons, the Criminal Petition is allowed in part quashing the proceedings in Calender Case No.619 of 2004, pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nandyal, Kurnool District in so far as A-2 is concerned and the Petition is dismissed in so far as A-1 is concerned. Further, the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nandyal, Kurnool district can proceed with the trial of the case against A-1, A-3 and A-4 respectively. __________________________ G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY, J Dated: 09-09-2011. Dsh. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY 231 CRIMINAL PETITION No.2886 OF 2008 September, 09, 2011 DSH