Allowed

Induslnd Bank Ltd. Rep. by Poa Mr. Ganesh Apa Shetgaonkar. v. Mr. Nilesh Kavlekar.

Bombay HC15 Jul 2015CRMA/140/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous application under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the High Court found that an arguable case existed due to defects in the complainant's authority. The Court granted leave to appeal against acquittal and directed action under section 390 of Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Leave to appeal against acquittal is granted; application allowed; Magistrate directed to take action under section 390 of Cr.P.C.

Induslnd Bank Ltd. Rep. by Poa Mr. Ganesh Apa Shetgaonkar… — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO. 140 OF 2015

¶3

¶4

STAMP NUMBER MAIN NO. 2733 OF 2014

¶5

INDUSLND BANK LTD. REP. BY POA MR. GANESH APA SHETGAONKAR. ... Applicant Versus MR. NILESH KAVLEKAR. ... Respondent

¶6

Mr. Pavithran A.V, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. Padgaonkar Chaitanya Prakash, Advocate for Respondent no. 1.

¶7

Coram:C. V. BHADANG, J.

¶8

Date:15th July, 2015

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

Heard Shri Pavithran A. V., learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Padgaonkar, the learned counsel for the respondent.

¶11

Perusal of the impugned judgment would show that except on the issue of authority to file the compliant the Magistrate has found all other ingredients of the offence under section 138 of the N.I. Act proved against the respondent.

¶12

It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the complaint was filed under the signature of one Anant Suresh Kerkar, Branch Incharge in whose favour there is a Power of Attorney executed by one S. Nagarajan, Joint Managing Director of the applicant on

¶13

2 CRMA/140/2015

¶14

4/3/2006. When the matter reached the stage of evidence, Anant Kerkar had ceased to be in service. On behalf of the applicant, PW.1, Sanit Bandodkar was examined, who had Power of Attorney in his favour executed by S. V. Parthasarathy, Executive Vice President of the applicant. It is submitted that in view of the administrative setup of a banking company, it cannot be expected that the person who is the signatory of the complaint would always be available at the time of hearing of the complaint. It is submitted that both these Powers of Attorney would sufficiently show that there was no defect in so far as the authority to lodge the complaint.

¶15

I find that an arguable case arises.

¶16

Leave to appeal against acquittal is granted. The application is accordingly allowed and disposed of.

¶17

The learned Magistrate to take action under section 390 of Cr.P.C.

¶18

C. V. BHADANG, J.

¶19

ap/-

Induslnd Bank Ltd. Rep. by Poa Mr. Ganesh Apa Shetgaonkar. v. Mr. Nilesh Kavlekar.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Induslnd Bank Ltd. Rep. by Poa Mr. Ganesh Apa Shetgaonkar. v. Mr. Nilesh Kavlekar.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Registrar of Coop. Societies Government of Goa., Vs Mr.Apolonario Gomes and 8 Ors.

Shri. Madhu Nair Vs the State of Goa through Police Inspector

Mr.Srunivasalu v. Ananthu @ a.Sreenivasalu @ Sreenvivasalu v. Ananth @ Ananthu v. Sreenivasulu. Vs Mr. Giri Kashinath Kurpaskar and Anr.

Mr. Rama Son of Raghu Tamsulkar @ Rama Gaude. Vs the State of Goa through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Goa and 3 Ors.

Mr. Rama Son of Raghu Tamsulkar @ Rama Gaude. Vs the State of Goa through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Goa and 3 Ors.

Mrs. Francisca Pereira E Miranda and 3 Ors., Vs Mr. Wausvel Joao Soccoro Santos Miranda and Anr.