Dismissed

M/S Perkin International Limited v. M/S. Shivalika Leasing and

Karnataka HC2 Sept 2021CRL.P/970/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka rejected a criminal petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing proceedings under Section 138 NI Act. The court held that engaging new counsel due to the original lawyer's death was an impermissible practice intended to circumvent court proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Quashment of criminal proceedings in C.C.No.831/2015 rejected; connected I.A.No.1/2019 rejected.

M/S Perkin International Limited Vs M/S. Shivalika… — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 02^nd DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

¶3

BEFORE:

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION No.970/2019

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

M/S PERKIN INTERNATIONAL LIMITED REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.2/149 SHANTHI HOUSE, CHENNAI-BYE-PASS ROAD KRISHNAGIRI-635001 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SMT SETHIL RANNI & MR .K.KARUNAKARAN

¶8

AND ALSO AT NO.8, 2^ND BLOCK, HOSUR MAIN ROAD KORAMANGALA MADIWALA POST BENGALURU-560068

¶9

AND ALSO AT NO.1795, 20^TH MAIN, SECTOR-1 H.S.R LAYOUT BENAGLURU-560034.

¶10

K. KARUNAKARAN S/O KAVERY CHETTY AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/AT NO.1795, 20^TH MAIN, SECTOR-I, H.S.R LAYOUT BENGALURU-560034.

¶11

¶12

AND ALSO AT NO.08, 2^ND BLOCK, HOSUR MAIN ROAD KORAMANGALA, MADIWALA POST BENGALURU-560068.

¶13

SENTHIL RANI W/O SRI K KARUNAKARAN AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT NO.1795, 20^TH MAIN SECTOR -I, H.S.R LAYOUT BENGALURU-560034.

¶14

AND ALSO AT NO.08, 2^ND BLOCK, HOSUR MAIN ROAD KORAMANGALA MADIWALA POST BENGALURU-560068.

¶15

... PETITIONERS

¶16

(BY SRI. VASANTH MADHAV, ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

M/S. SHIVALIKA LEASING AND FINANCE LIMITED REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.V-17, GREEN PARK EXTENSION DELHI-110016.

¶19

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AT K.R.MILL COMPOUND MYSURU-BENGALURU ROAD MYSURU-570003 REP. BY AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SHRI NAGENDRA TIWARI

¶20

ALSO AT REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.2/149, SHANTHI HOUSE CHENNAI-BYE PASS ROAD KRISHNAGIRI -635001 TAMIL NADU.

¶21

... RESPONDENT

¶22

¶23

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C., PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH ALL PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AGAINST THE PETITIONERS BY THE RESPONDENT IN C.C.NO.831/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE II-JMFC, MYSURU (OLD NO.844/2008 IN PCR.NO.585/2008) UNDER SECTION 200 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I ACT.

¶24

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioners Sri.Vasantha Madhav is appearing through video conference in lien and submits that the counsel, viz., D.Sheshadri passed away on 09.05.2021 due to COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, he undertakes to file vakalath on behalf of the petitioners.

¶27

The submission made by the learned counsel is placed on record.

¶28

Counsel who is appearing through video conference submits that petitioners have been arraigned as accused in C.C.No.831/2015 (old No.844/2008 in PCR No.585/2008).

¶29

¶30

Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., for quashment of the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.831/2015 pending before the JMFC, II Court at Mysore, but later numbered as PCR No.585/2008 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act vide Annexure-A in respect of the order sheet maintained by the Court having jurisdiction and the same having been produced for the purpose of reference.

¶31

As per the order sheet of the trial court, NBW issued against Accused Nos.2 and 3 imposing penalty for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on 27.01.2010. There was an order passed on application filed under Section 205 of Cr.P.C., whereby seeking permanent exemption from personal appearance and sought for dispensation of attendance before the Court and seeking permission to appear through counsel. Counsel for the appellant filed an application and a detailed order has been

¶32

¶33

passed. Consequently, the application filed under Section 205 of Cr.P.C., by the accused person is hereby dismissed. On 28.06.2012, E.P was allowed and ordered for appearance of the complainant and posted for complainant’s evidence. On 20.02.2013, the case was posted on 13.03.2013 for recording statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. On 30.08.2013, EP was allowed and posted for orders on application under Section 311 Cr.P.C., on 10.09.2013, on which date, the application was allowed subject to payment of cost of Rs.300/-. On 24.06.2017, NBW was issued against the accused. Further, NBW was reissued on several future dates. These are the stages of the case maintained by the court having jurisdiction relating to an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

¶34

It is relevant to refer the initiation of the criminal prosecution by the complainant against the accused vide Annexure-B in PCR No.584/2008 relating to the case in

¶35

¶36

C.C.No.844/2008. Complainant has initiated criminal

¶37

prosecution against Accused Nos.1 to 3 by following the requisite conditions of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Subsequent to initiation of the criminal prosecution, case has been registered for the offence under

¶38

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

¶39

As there is a special provision to the concept of cognizance, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in CON.MT.PET(C)Nos.614-620/2020 in SLP(C)Nos.2566725668/2016 (S.K.GHOSE vs. SURESH SHANTARAM SATPURE (D) & ORS.), instead of remaining physically present for reporting compliance, they have chosen to engage new Advocate. We deprecate the practice and also express hope that the advocates accepting such last minutes briefs should eschew from doing so, which is nothing but trying to circumvent the proceedings before the Court. This dictum is

¶40

¶41

squarely applicable to the case of the petitioner. Therefore, in a criminal prosecution for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a new counsel has been engaged, due to the death of the previous counsel. But the present case pertaining to quashment of C.C.No.831/2015, arises out of old C.C.No.844/2008 in P.C.R.No.585/2008.

¶42

Therefore, the petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., by the petitioner seeking quashment of the criminal petition deserves to be rejected and it is accordingly, rejected. In view of the dismissal of the main petition, I.A.No.1/2019 does not survive for consideration and the same is accordingly, rejected.

¶43

Sd/JUDGE

¶44

bnv*

M/S Perkin International Limited v. M/S. Shivalika Leasing and

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Perkin International Limited v. M/S. Shivalika Leasing and

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Kanyakumari Vs the State of Karnataka

Krishnakanth K Vs State by White Field Police

Sri Ujval Reddy K Vs State by Kengeri Police

Lakshminarasimha Prasad Vs S. Ramachandra

Syed Chman Shah Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Krishna Murthy Vs State by Kumaraswamy Layout