22 April 2009
Supreme Court
Download

C.G. PRAVEEN Vs MOHD. TAJUDDIN

Case number: Crl.A. No.-001338-001338 / 2002
Diary number: 23425 / 2002
Advocates: Vs Y. RAJA GOPALA RAO


1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1338 OF 2002

C.G. Praveen      ...Appellant(s)

Versus

Mohd. Tajuddin and Anr.      ...Respondent(s)

With Criminal Appeal Nos.813 of 2003, 440 of 2005 and 443 of 2005

O  R  D  E  R

Criminal Appeal No.1338 of 2002

Heard learned counsel for the parties. By  the  impugned  order,  the  High  Court  quashed  the  prosecution  of  

respondent no.1 Mohd. Tajuddin under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments  Act, 1881 (for short, “the Act”) only on the ground that  the complaint was filed by  

the power of attorney holder of the payee and not the payee himself.  The question  whether the signing of  complaint  by the payee himself  is  sine qua non for taking  cognizance  of  offence  under  Section  138  of  the  Act  is  no  longer  res  integra.   In  Shankar Finance and Investments v.  State of Andhra Pradesh and others [(2008) 8  

SCC 536], this Court interpreted Section 142 of the Act and held that a complaint  under Section 138 can be filed by the payee through his power of attorney holder.  In  

this case, the complaint was filed by the payee through his power of attorney holder.  This being the position, the High Court was not justified in quashing the prosecution  

of respondent no.1.   ...2/-

2

- 2 -  

Accordingly,  the appeal is allowed, impugned order is set aside and the  petition  filed  by  respondent  no.1  under  Section  482  of  the  Code  of  Criminal  

Procedure is dismissed.  Now, the trial court shall proceed with the case in accordance  with law.   

As the complaint was filed in 1996, we direct the concerned trial court to  conclude the trial within six months from the date of receipt/production of the copy of  

this order. Criminal Appeal Nos. 813 of 2003, 440 of 2005 and 443 of 2005.

In view of the order passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1338 of 2002, these  

appeals are allowed in the similar terms.

......................J.       [B.N. AGRAWAL]

......................J.       [G.S. SINGHVI]

New Delhi, April 22, 2009.