IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-23757 of 2011 (O & M) Date of Decision: August 08, 2011 Raj Kumar .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS Mehak Rakhi .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. Arihant Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing complaint bearing No.1415 dated 10.6.2010 titled ‘Mehak Rakhi vs. Raj Kumar’ for commission of offence under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, pending before Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Karnal. 2. Learned counsel has vehemently argued that signatory of the cheque as also the company were required to be impleaded as accused. In the case in hand, needful has not been done and therefore, this petition merits favourable order in quashing Crl. Misc. No. M-23757 of 2011 [2] the complaint and the summoning order. 3. I have considered the contentions of the learned counsel. 4. Annexure P-1 is a copy of the complaint. In the memo of parties, accused has been named as “Mr. Raj Kumar C/o M/s Raj Kumar & Brothers, Nagpal Book Store, Piran Wala Gate, Sunam, Punjab 148028”. It is not in dispute that signatory of the cheque is Raj Kumar. 5. On perusal of the memo of parties and the name of the accused as mentioned in the complaint, as extracted above, it becomes evident that Raj Kumar gave a negotiable instrument to the respondent-complainant on behalf of M/s Raj Kumar & Brothers, Nagpal Book Store. In such circumstances, on such hyper technical ground, as pleaded on behalf of the petitioner, the complaint cannot be quashed. 6. The petition is dismissed. (AJAI LAMBA) August 08, 2011 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?