Allowed

Arvind Singh Rajpoot v. M/S.Intersight Holidays Pvt. Ltd.

Kerala HC16 Aug 2023Crl.MC/984/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, in a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., allowed the petitioner's prayer to quash the criminal complaint. The court held that Intersight Holidays Pvt. Ltd. lacks locus standi to prosecute since the cheques in question were issued in favour of Intersight Tours and Travels Pvt. Ltd. without evidence of name change.

What did the court decide?

The complaint CC No. 235/2016 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-IV Ernakulam and the proceedings therein are quashed.

Arvind Singh Rajpoot Vs M/S.Intersight Holidays Pvt. Ltd. — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 16^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023/25TH SRAVANA, 1945

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 984 OF 2018

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 235/2016 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE

¶7

OF FIRST CLASS - IV, ERNAKULAM

¶8

PETITIONER:

¶9

ARVIND SINGH RAJPOOT AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.LATE RAMESH CHANDRA RAJPOOT, XENIUM HOLIDAYS PVT. LTD., 77, 1ST FLOOR, JANAKPURI EAST, METRO STATION GATE NO.3, NEW DELHI.110 058.

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.R.PADMARAJ SRI.P.J.ANTONY JOSEPH MARIADAS SRI.R.AJITH KUMAR V.K.EDOM

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 M/S.INTERSIGHT HOLIDAYS PVT. LTD 28/343, BENISTA BUILDING, SA ROAD, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI -682 036, KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR. ABRAHAM GOERGE.

¶13

2 MS. INVITEE INDIA HOLIDAYS PVT. LTD. 24, SEWAK PARK, DWARAKA MODE, UTTAM NAGAR, METRO STATION PILLAR NO.771,NEW DELHI.110 059.

¶14

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

¶15

BY ADVS. SRI.ARUN THOMAS SRI.JENNIS STEPHEN SMT.KARTHIKA MARIA SMT.MARIA ROY SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW SRI.VIJAY V. PAUL SMT.VEENA RAVEENDRAN

¶16

SRI. M P PRASANTH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

CRL.MC NO. 984 OF 2018

¶19

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

Dated this the 16^th day of August, 2023

¶22

This is a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶23

The 2^nd accused in C.C.235/2016 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-IV, Ernakulam seeks quashment of complaint on the ground that the complainant has no locus standi to prosecute the 2^nd accused.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2 as well as the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.

¶25

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

¶26

Annexure E, E1 and E2 cheques for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) each, where from the prosecution emanates, were issued in the name of 'Intersight Tours and Travels Pvt. Ltd'. But on dishounour of the cheque, the Director of Intersight Holidays Pvt.Ltd. issued legal notice and complaint also was filed by Intersight Holidays Pvt.Ltd.

¶27

On perusal of Annexure E, E1 and E2 cheques,

¶28

¶29

CRL.MC NO. 984 OF 2018

¶30

Annexure F legal notice and Annenxure G copy of complaint, the submission appears to be convincing.

¶31

The learned counsel for the respondents also could not justify filing of complaint by Intersight Holidays Pvt.Ltd. in relation to three cheques issued in favour of Intersight Tours and Travels Pvt. Ltd.

¶32

On perusal of the complaint, nothing stated as to change of name of the Intersight Tours and Travels Pvt.Ltd. to Intersight Holidays Pvt.Ltd. Prima facie, it appears that the present complainant has no locus standi to prosecute the accused and as such, the complaint is liable to be quashed. Therefore, I am inclined to invoke the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. in this particular case and accordingly, this petition stands allowed.

¶33

It is ordered that the complaint against the petitioner pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-IV Ernakulam as C.C.No.235/2016 and the proceedings thereof stand quashed.

¶34

Sd/A. BADHARUDEEN JUDGE

¶35

nkr

¶36

CRL.MC NO. 984 OF 2018

¶37

¶38

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 984/2018

¶39

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶40

ANNEXURE A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REGISTERED COVER RECEIVED FROM THE JFCM-IV COURT IN THE NAME OF RAJPOOT-XENIUM HOLIDAYS.

¶41

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REGISTERED COVER RECEIVED FROM THE JFCM-IV COURT IN THE NAME OF ARAVIND RAJPOOT-XENIUM HOLIDAYS.

¶42

ANNEXURE B TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECORDS OBTAINED FROM THE WEB SITE OF MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS WITH REGARD TO THE PETITIONER.

¶43

ANNEXURE C TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED NIL ISSUED BY THE 1ST ACCUSED IN FAVOUR OF 2ND ACCUSED.

¶44

ANNEXURE D TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE E-MAIL COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE OFFICERS OF M/S.INTERSIGHT TOURS AND TRAVELS PVT.

¶45

ANNEXURE E TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF CHEQUE NO.118374 OF YES BANK FAVOURING INTERSIGHT TOURS AND TRAVELS PRIVATE LIMITED.

¶46

ANNEXURE E1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF CHEQUE NO.118375 OF YES BANK FAVOURING INTERSIGHT TOURS AND TRAVELS PRIVATE LIMITED.

¶47

ANNEXURE E2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF CHEQUE NO.118376 OF YES BANK FAVOURING INTERSIGHT TOURS AND TRAVELS PRIVATE LIMITED.

¶48

ANNEXURE F TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REGISTERED NOTICE DATED 22.05.2014 ISSUED ON BEHALF OF INTERSIGHT HOLIDAYS PVT.

¶49

CRL.MC NO. 984 OF 2018

¶50

¶51

LTD. TO 1ST ACCUSED AND TO PETITIONER.

¶52

ANNEXURE G CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN C.C.NO.235/2016 OF THE JFCM-IV, ERNAKULAM.

Arvind Singh Rajpoot v. M/S.Intersight Holidays Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind Singh Rajpoot v. M/S.Intersight Holidays Pvt. Ltd.

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

Sakthidharan. G Vs Sree Gokukam Chit and Finance Company Pvt. Ltd.

Pauly Vs State of Kerala

Joseph @ Jomon Vs State of Kerala

Seena R.Sethu Vs Peter Thomas

A.M.Anantha Raj Vs M.Muhammed Nazeem

Muhammed Navas C.K. Vs Arshitha. C.