V.S. Shivadas S/O V. Sreedharan Vs. Ramanath Shetty S/O S.H. Setty and S. Gajanana Partner of Sri Ramanath Transport - Court Judgment |
| SooperKanoon Citation | sooperkanoon.com/382629 |
| Subject | Criminal |
| Court | Karnataka High Court |
| Decided On | Apr-20-2006 |
| Case Number | Crl.A No 1315 of 2000 |
| Judge | K. Sreedhar Rao, J. |
| Reported in | 2006CriLJ3392 |
| Acts | Negotiable Instruments Act - Sections 138; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 384(4) |
| Appellant | V.S. Shivadas S/O V. Sreedharan |
| Respondent | Ramanath Shetty S/O S.H. Setty and S. Gajanana Partner of Sri Ramanath Transport |
| Appellant Advocate | A.S. Mahesha, Adv. |
| Respondent Advocate | S. Vasanth Madhav, Adv. |
Excerpt:
.....not entail dismissal or acquittal - complaint should be kept pending until ripening of cause of action or complaint should be returned with advise to complainant for proper presentation after completion of statutory waiting period - accordingly held, dismissal of complaint bad in law and thus, set aside - matter remitted to the trial court for fresh disposal - karnataka societies registration act, 1960 (17 of 1960) section 25: [anand byrareddy,j] proceedings under karnataka societies registration rules, 1961, rule 8 the procedure to be followed by the registrar legality of conducted - held, it is seen that a reading of section 25 of the act and rule 8 of the rules, 1961, it could be seen that there are three situations in which the registrar can initiate an enquiry. he may act on his..........of the complainant that towards repayment of legal liabilities arising out of the business transaction, the cheque ex.p.1 for rs. 30,000/- is issued. upon presentation the cheque is dishonored. ex.p.2 is the endorsement regarding the dishonor issued by the bank dated 17-8-1998. the legal notice is issued on 24-8-1998. the said notice is received on 2-9-1998 by the accused and has given reply as per ex.p.8. the complaint is presented on 14-9-1998.3. the trial court after recording evidence, dismissed the complaint and acquitted the accused on the ground that it is a case of premature presentation of the complaint. the complaint is presented before the completion of the statutory waiting period and that there is no cause of action as on the date of complaint under section 138 of the.....
Judgment:K. Sreedhar Rao, J.
1. The appellant-complainant prosecuted the accused for an offence Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
2. It is the case of the complainant that towards repayment of legal liabilities arising out of the business transaction, the cheque Ex.P.1 for Rs. 30,000/- is issued. Upon presentation the cheque is dishonored. Ex.P.2 is the endorsement regarding the dishonor issued by the bank dated 17-8-1998. The legal notice is issued on 24-8-1998. The said notice is received on 2-9-1998 by the accused and has given reply as per Ex.P.8. The complaint is presented on 14-9-1998.
3. The trial court after recording evidence, dismissed the complaint and acquitted the accused on the ground that it is a case of premature presentation of the complaint. The complaint is presented before the completion of the statutory waiting period and that there is no cause of action as on the date of complaint Under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.
4. The Supreme Court in Narsingh Das Tapadia v. Goverdhah Das Partani and Anr. (2000) 7 SCC 183 has held that presentation of premature complaint should not entail in dismissal or in acquittal. It is held that the complaint should be kept pending until the ripening of cause of action or the complaint should be returned with an advise to the complainant for proper presentation after completion of the necessary statutory waiting period. In view of the decision of the Supreme Court, the dismissal of the complaint is bad in law. The same is set aside. The matter is remitted to the trial court for fresh disposal in accordance with law.