TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (8) TMI 1089
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a private limited company engaged in inter-alia the business of Development of Wireless Technologies and Development of Software in relation thereto. It is the case of the Applicant, that he came to be associated with a Company being M/s. Echovox (India) Pvt. Ltd. for the purpose of rendering his specialized advise in legal matters. It is the case of the Applicant that whenever he was invited on the board of directors of any of the companies, the same was accepted on a clear understanding that the applicant would be associated only for his expert legal advice and would not be concerned with the day-to-day business affairs and functioning of the company or the conduct of the business of the company. On 01/04/2003, the Applicant tendered his resignation from the board of directors of the said Company M/s. Echovox (India) Pvt. Ltd. Pursuant to the resignation of the Applicant, on 16/04/2003 the said Company filed Form No.32 with the Registrar of Companies. Thereafter on or about 3rd and 4th May 2003 the said Company issued two cheques of Rs. 28164/- and 36972/- respectively to Respondent No.2 for certain transactions entered into by the said Company with Respondent No.2. When the said....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat the applicant was a director at the relevant time, there was no other allegations against the Applicant in the said complaint. It is stated that the applicant was not involved in the transaction between the accused company with the complainant and the cheques in question were not signed by the applicant. The complainant has not produced any document showing that the applicant was aware of any transaction or dealings of the accused company with the complainant. The applicant therefore prayed that the process issued against him may be recalled, and he may be discharged from the present case. 5. The said application was opposed to by Respondent No.2 by filing a reply. It is stated in the said reply that the accused had committed an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and all the procedure laid down in the Negotiable Instruments Act is followed by the complainant. The complainant submits that as per the information received by the complainant the accused No.6 is the first subscriber to the memorandum of association of accused No.1 company and is also the first director of accused No.1 company. It is submitted that the applicant was the director of the co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of directors of the accused company. It is submitted that the applicant was not aware of the transaction between the accused company and the complaint. He also submitted that the applicant is not concerned with the day to day affairs and dealings of the company. He therefore submits that there is no involvement of the applicant in the alleged offences, and impleading the applicant in the complaint as an accused is nothing but an harassment, and great hardship would be caused to the applicant, if he is not discharged from the present case. He therefore prays that this Criminal Application may be allowed and the process issued qua the present applicant may be recalled and he may be discharged from the present case. 8. In spite of service and recently steps taken by the applicant to serve the 2nd Respondent, none appears for the 2nd Respondent in the matter. 9. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP appearing for the 1st Respondent/State at length. With their able assistance I have perused the pleadings and grounds taken in the application as also the annexures thereto. I have also perused the material placed before me and the reasons assigned by the le....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....im as an accused in the earlier notice dated 03/04/2003. It is also stated by the applicant that the complainant has deliberately impleaded him as an accused. It is also informed to the complainant that the complainant is free to take inspection of the documents in respect of the resignation of the applicant. 12. The learned counsel for the applicant laid emphasis on the fact that the applicant has already been resigned from the board of directors of the accused No.1 company prior to issuance of the cheuqes in question by the accused company in favour of Respondent No.2 complainant towards the lease contract between the accused company of Respondent No.2. Significantly it is required to be noted that the applicant by letter dated 01/04/2003 submitted his resignation as the director of the accused No.1 company, and the cheques in question were issued by the accused No.1 company to Respondent No.2 admittedly on 3rd and 4th May 2003. To buttress his submissions that the applicant has resigned prior to issuance of cheaques, the learned counsel for the applicant invites the attention of this Court to the letter dated 01/04/2003 which is on page 16 at Exhibit B of the Criminal Applica....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that the document produced on record by the applicant is unimpeachable and incontrovertible in nature. 14. Respondent No.2 Complainant has not produced on record any document showing that the Applicant was the director of the accused No.1 Company at the time of issuance of cheque. On overall reading of the complaint shows that except mere stating that Applicant was director and concerned with the day to day affairs of the accused No.1 company, Respondent No.2/Complaint did not bring on record unimpeachable and incontrovertible evidence which would clearly indicate that the Applicant is involved in the present case. The complaint does not contain the basic averment which is sufficient to make out a prima facie case against the present applicant. Because of the absence of more particulars about the role of the applicant as the director, it could not be held that the applicant as director is concerned with the issuance of the cheques in question. Considering the unimpeachable and incontrovertible document i.e. Form No.32 produced by the applicant, this Court is of the view that the Criminal Application deserves to be allowed. 15. As already observed herein above, the Applicant w....