7 On a perusal of the records, it reveals that the petitioners sought discharge on the ground that at the time of issuing the cheque, they were not partners in the partnership firm. But, since the borrower company is a partnership firm, they failed to produce any legal proof to prove the fact that on the date of issuance of the cheque, they are not partners in the said company. Even though, at the time of issuing the cheque, they were not partners, but at the time of borrowing money, they are partners in the firm and the same was admitted by all the accused in the above case. Once they admitted that they were partners of the firm, it is for them to file a proof to show that on the date of issuing cheque, they were not continued as partners of the firm. The learned Magistrate has rightly appreciated the above facts and dismissed the petition seeking discharge, in which, this Court does not find any perversity. Further at the time of deciding petition, seeking discharge, the Court has to see the allegations and averments made in the complaint and the defence taken by the accused need not be looked into. The probative value of the materials need not gone into at this stage.
