2018 (5) TMI 789

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r, on the dates 20th, 24th & 20th of April, 2017, respectively in the complaints titled 'Mr Anil Bhan, Advocate v. M/S Spectrum Techno Projects Private Limited & Ors.' (File No. 30/A); Mr Anil Bhan, Advocate v. M/S Techno Projects Private Limited & Ors.' (file No. 108/A); and Mr Anil Bhan, Advocate v. M/S Spectrum Techno Projects Private Limited' (File No. 29/A) respectively and have challenged the same through the medium of these petitions filed under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr. P.C.) on the grounds, inter alia, that on the bulwark of these orders the learned trial Magistrate has opined that the petitioners herein this petition are, prima facie, found involved in the commission of offences punishable under Section ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....unsel for the petitioners has put explicit reliance on a judgment delivered by the Apex Court of the country in the case of 'Yogendra Pratap Singh v. Savitri Pandey & Anr.', reported in 'AIR 2015 SC 157', in which a question to be answered, which reads as follows, was formulated by the Supreme Court: "Can cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 be taken on the basis of a complaint filed before the expiry of the period of 15 days stipulated in the notice required to be served upon the drawer of the cheque in terms of Section 138." The answer to the above question has been provided at paragraph Nos. 38 and 39 of the judgment which, for the convenience of ready reference, are rep....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on of this Court in Sarav Investment and Financial Consultancy Private Limited and Anr. v. Llyods Register of Shipping Indian Office Staff Provident Fund and Anr.: (2007) 14 SCC 753 and also the judgments of the High Courts which have taken the view following this judgment that the complaint Under Section 138 of the NI Act filed before the expiry of 15 days of service of notice could not be treated as a complaint in the eye of law and criminal proceedings initiated on such complaint are liable to be quashed." 05. When confronted with the above position, the learned counsel representing the respondents admitted that the respondents have erred in law in filing the complaints before the expiry of the period detailed in Section 138(C) of the....