Rama Shankar Almal & Anr. v. Technology Information Forecasting and Assessment Council & Anr.

1. By this instant petition the petitioners are praying for quashing of proceedings pending against them in the complaint case No.950/L12009, under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 filed by respondent No.l.

2. In the said complaint case learned MM has issued summons to the petitioners vide order dated 04.02.2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners/ accused Nos.[3] & 4 namely Sh.Rama Shankar and Sh.Pramod Kr Jhunjhunwala respectively had resigned from the Board of Directors of the company, much prior to the issuance of cheques in question i.e. between 28.9.2006 to 29.03.2008.

3. The respondent No.Ucomplainant filed the complaint against the petitioners and has impleaded four accused therein. In the complaint, accused No.1 is the company and accused No.2 is the.Managing Director of the company. lf the proceeding against t CRL. M.C.758/2O77 & Crl.M.A 2884/2077 Page tr of 2 2011:DHC:9299 /' a the petitioners/accused Nos.[3] & 4 is quashed, it will not affect the outcome of the comPlaint.

4. Ld.counsel for respondent has agreed that the both the accused i.e. accused Nos.[3] & 4 may be deleted from the array of the parties in the comPlaint case.

5. Keeping the statement of ld.counsel for respondent No'1 into view and the contention of petitioners, in the interest of justice, I hereby quash the aforesaid complaint case bearing No.950/1 l2}0g pending before the Ld.Magistrate qua the accused Nos.[3] & 4 namely Sh.Rama Shankar and Sh.Pramod Kr Jhunjhunwala who are the petitioners in the instant petition.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal M.C. No.75Bl2011 is allowed and disposed of in the above terms.

7. In view of above, Criminal M.A. No.2884l20LL stands disposed of as having become infructuous.

8. Needless to state that if the respondent No.l wants to implead rest of the directors, then he can do so in accordance with law.

9. Dasti. suREsH KAIT, J +t August 18th ?OLL gvlL