2022 (9) TMI 381

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....titioner is prosecuted for having committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The complainant firm is represented by its power agent/S.Kannan. In the complaint, it is stated that the complainant is a registered partnership firm functioning in the name and style 'M/s.Raja Holding'. The petitioner accused borrowed a loan of Rs.20,00,000/- from the complainant. The complainant paid that amount through it's account in the Indian Overseas Bank, Town Branch Kumbakonam, on 30.09.2015, by cheque bearing No.440332. The petitioner had executed a pronote for the loan amount and agreed to repay the same with 30% of interest per annum. Till 15.07.2018, the accused person repaid a sum of Rs.21,25,000....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lowing judgments: '1.Aneeta Hada Vs.M/s.Godfather Travels and Tours Private Limited, reported in AIR 2012 SC 2795. 2.N.Elangovan Vs. C.Ganesan reported in (2014) 4 MLJ (Crl) 517, 3.Rangabashyam and another Vs.Ramesh, in Crl.O.P.No.13147 of 2015, 4.Dilip Hariramani Vs.Bank of Baroda, in Crl.A.No.767 of 2022.' 4.The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner further reiterated the other grounds raised in the grounds of appeal and thus pleaded to quash the criminal proceedings in S.T.C.No.498 of 2021, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kumbakonam. 5.The learned Counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner borrowed the said amount as his personal loan not as a partner to the AMD Ho....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ined by AMD Housing Developer. The account No. is 34325380616 is also not disputed. It is clear that the name of the drawer of the cheque is AMD Housing Developer. It is signed by the petitioner. Now, the question is whether the petitioner borrowed the loan amount in his personal capacity or borrowed the loan for AMD Housing Developers, because the cheque belongs to the account maintained by AMD Housing Developers' account. Whether the cheque was issued only for security purpose and the same has been misused by the respondent as raised in the grounds of appeal in para 'w'. Further, in the reply notice of the petitioner, he had not stated that the loan was borrowed by AMD Housing Developers and the cheque was issued by AMD Housin....