Smt. Basanti vs Karamveer

Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J.—By this common order, two petitions bearing Criminal Misc. No. M-45952 of 2007 and Criminal Misc. No. M-6911 of 2008 will be decided together.

Both the above petitions have been filed by Smt. Basanti. Criminal Misc. No. M-45952 of 2007 has been filed seeking quashing of the complaint instituted by Karamveer against M/s BSR Instruments Pvt. Ltd and others u/s 138 read with Section 141 and 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Mr. Shiv Kumar has caused appearance for the respondent in this petition.

Criminal Misc. No. M-6911 of 2008 has been preferred by Smt. Basanti seeking quashing of criminal complaint titled as Sai Enterprises v. BSR Instruments Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. u/s 138 read with Section 141 and 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act. In this petition, no notice of motion was issued and it was ordered to be heard with Criminal Misc. No. M-45952 of 2007. As the matter has been argued and the Court has comprehended the controversy raised, notice of motion has been issued. Mr. Shiv Kumar has stated that he accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

Petitioner has submitted that two sons of Karamveer, namely Naresh Kumar and Manoj Kumar were employee of husband of the petitioner. During course of their employment, they had stolen two cheques and handed over the same to Karamveer, their father and M/s Shree Sai Enterprises. Both have instituted a complaint u/s 138 read with Sections 141 and 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that she had lodged case FIR No. 340 dated 17.11.2006 u/s 408 and 420 IPC against Manoj Kumar and Naresh Kumar. In the case arising out of FIR, report 173 Cr.P.C. (challan) has been submitted and trial of the case is pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate (1st Class), Palwal. Whereas, two complaints instituted against the petitioner by Karamveer and M/s Shree Sai Enterprises are pending before Judicial Magistrate (1st Class) at Faridabad.

I have heard counsel for the parties. The grievance made by the petitioner in the FIR is essentially, her defence in the complaint filed under the Negotiable Instruments Act by respondent Karamveer and M/s Sai Enterprises. Vice versa, cheques were issued to Karamveer and Sai Enterprises, naturally is defence of Naresh Kumar and Manoj Kumar, sons of Karamveer respondent in the FIR case. In case both the cases are tried by different courts, there is apprehension of occurrence of judicial embarrassment in parallal proceedings. Therefore, counsel for the parties are in agreement that FIR case and two complaints, details of which have been mentioned above, be tried by one Court, simultaneously but separately.

Accordingly, it is ordered that case arising out of FIR No. 340 dated 17.11.2006 at Palwal shall stand transferred to the Court at Faridabad. Sessions Judge, Faridabad shall entrust the case arising out of FIR and two complaints against the petitioner, to one Court, who shall try all the three cases simultaneously but separately. An application shall be filed by the petitioner before the Sessions Judge, Faridabad wherein details of the FIR and two complaints shall be given, so that the Sessions Judge, in compliance with this order, is able to entrust all the three cases to one Court. Parties shall appear before the Sessions Judge, Faridabad on 4th May, 2009.

Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that she is not signatory to the cheques and she is a lady. Alleged cheques have been issued by her husband, therefore, her personal appearance be exempted.

Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is a lady and her husband is facing prosecution, her personal appearance in both the complaints filed u/s 138 read with Section 141 and 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act, is exempted subject to her filing an undertaking that she shall cause her appearance as and when required by the trial Court. She shall also file an undertaking that the evidence, if any, recorded in her absence but in the presence of her counsel, shall be binding upon her. The trial Court may incorporate any other conditions in the undertaking to be submitted by the accused.

With these observations, present petition is disposed off.