Allowed

C.M.Kuriakose v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Sept 2008Crl.MC/2101/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed six criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against petitioners who were accused as company directors but were not on the date of dishonour. Relying on material proving they had ceased to be directors and the complainant's lack of objection, the Court allowed the petitions to quash cases alleging no criminal liability.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of proceedings in six prosecutions (S.T. Nos. 1198/2006, 404/07, 299/07, 300/07, 356/07, 298/07) against petitioners.

C.M.Kuriakose Vs State of Kerala — Company and Corporate | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 18TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 27TH BHADRA 1930

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 2101 of 2007()

¶6

------------------------ST.1198/2006 of CHIEF JUDL.MAGISTRATE, ERNAKULAM ....................

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED 3,4,6 & 7:

¶8

¶9

C.M.KURIAKOSE, CHOLAYIL HOUSE,KAKKAVAYAL PO, MEENANGADI,WAYANAD.

¶10

C.SARAKUTTY,

¶11

CHOLAYIL HOUSE,KAKKAVAYAL PO, MEENANGADI,WAYANAD.

¶12

LISSY, W/O.C.K.SAJI, CHOLAYIL HOUSE,KAKKAVAYAL PO, MEENANGADI,WAYANAD.

¶13

FEMY, W/O.C.K.SALU, CHOLAYIL HOUSE,KAKKAVAYAL PO, MEENANGADI,WAYANAD.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN

¶15

SMT.A.K.PREETHA

¶16

RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT AND ACCUSED 1,2 AND 5:

¶17

¶18

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶19

M/S.STRATEGY EXPORTS(I) PVT.LTD., NO.774, I FLOOR, DOUBLE ROAD, INDIRA NAGAR,

¶20

2ND STAGE, BANGALORE REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR JOHN THOMA, S/O.K.M.THOMAS, AGED 46 YEARS.

¶21

M/S.CHOLAS SPICES PRIVATE LTD., MP/VII/24, PULLUMALA, MEENANGADI PANCHAYATH, MEENANGADI, WYNAD REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR C.K.SALU.

¶22

C.K.SALU, S/O.C.M.KURIAKOSE, AGED 33 , DIRECTOR, M/S.CHOLAS SPICES PVT.LTD, CHOLAYIL HOUSE,KAKKAVAYAL PO, MEENANGADI,WAYANAD.

¶23

C.K.SAJI, S/O.C.M.KURIAKOSE, AGED 30, DIRECTOR, M/S.CHOLAS SPICES PRIVATE LTD., CHOLAYIL HOUSE,KAKKAVAYAL PO, MEENANGADI,WAYANAD.

¶24

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZER SRI.P.GOPINATH FOR R.2

¶25

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/09/2008, ALONG WITH CRMC NO. 3161 OF 2007 CRMC NO. 3162 OF 2007 CRMC NO. 3163 OF 2007 CRMC NO. 3171 OF 2007 CRMC NO. 3178 OF 2007 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

R.BASANT, J.

¶27

---------------------- Crl.M.C.Nos.2101,3161,3162,3163, 3171 & 3178 of 2007

¶28

Dated this the 18^th day of September 2008

¶29

O R D E R

¶30

The petitioners are accused 3,4,6 and 7 in six prosecutions all under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and all filed by the same complainant that is the common second respondent herein. In such complaint altogether there are seven accused persons. In addition to the four petitioners herein respondents 3,4 and 5 figure as accused 1,2 and 5 in all these prosecutions. The first accused is a company which is alleged to have committed the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the petitioners herein are arrayed as directors of the said company.

¶31

The petitioners take the stand that they were not directors of the company on the relevant date, that is the date of dishonour of the cheque, and that the prosecution against them is totally unjustified. They cannot be mulcted with the criminal liability for any conduct on the part of the second respondent/first accused company on a date when they were not even directors of the company. They rely on the statements filed before the Registrar of Companies to drive home their

¶32

Crl.M.C.No.2101/08

¶33

¶34

contention that they had ceased to be directors of the company on the relevant dates.

¶35

Notice was given to the respondent/complainant. Respondent/complainant has appeared through a counsel. The learned counsel Sri.Gopinath accepts that the petitioners were not directors of the company on the date when the offence was committed. This has been realised only subsequently on production of materials before this court by the petitioners. In these circumstances, it is submitted that the second respondent/ complainant has no objection against the quashing of proceedings in so far as it relates to petitioners 1 to 4.

¶36

Thus there is no contention worth the name between the parties in these petitions. As agreed, the prosecution in so far as it relates to the petitioners herein who are accused 3,4,6 and 7 in S.T.Nos.1198/2006, 404/07, 299/07, 300/07, 356/07, 298/07 all pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam are hereby quashed. It is submitted at the Bar that later the cases have been transferred to the learned J.F.C.M-II, Kochin and different numbers have been assigned for those cases. This order shall relate to such renumbered cases.

¶37

These petitions are allowed as above.

¶38

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

jsr

Crl.M.C.No.2101/08 3

Crl.M.C.No.2101/08 4

R.BASANT, J.

CRL.M.C.No. of 2008

ORDER

09/07/2008

C.M.Kuriakose v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.M.Kuriakose v. State of Kerala

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

V.U.Raju Vs Benny Varghese

N.P.R.Finance Ltd. Vs Bindhu K.S.

M/S.Sree Gokulam Chits & Co. Pvt. Ltd., Vs Prabhakaran Pillai & Another

State of Kerala Vs Arakka Hamza

Rajalakshmi Vs State of Kerala

Herbert T.Jerrald Vs S.I. of Police