APHC010018662024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 532/2024 Between: Sunstar Seed Pvt. Ltd., and Others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND State Of A P and Others ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. G V SRIRAMA MURTY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S): 1. SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI 2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) The Court made the following Order: The petition is filed seeking quashing of C.C. No. 717 of 2022 on the file of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Sathenapalli. The petitioners are arraigned as Accused Nos. 1 and 2 for the alleged offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the complaint is filed for the second time against the petitioners, and the first complaint, which 2 was filed vide C.C. No. 213 of 2016 on the file of the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Sathenapalli, was challenged by the petitioners by filing Crl.P. No. 14682 of 2016 on the ground that the complaint was filed in a premature manner without following the mandatory timelines as contemplated under Section 138 of the NI Act. This Court, considering the non-compliance with the provisions under Sections 138 and 142 of the NI Act, quashed C.C. No. 213 of 2016. However, liberty was granted to the complainant to file a fresh complaint. This Court further condoned the delay in filing the complaint on account of the pendency of Crl.P. No. 14682 of 2016. 3. It is submitted that the petitioners have now filed a fresh complaint against the respondents, and the same has been taken on file by the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Sathenapalli, as C.C. No. 717 of 2022, seeking quashing of the complaint on the following grounds: Ground No.A: The 2nd respondent issued a legal notice dated 25.04.2016 covering all five cheques and has filed a single complaint for the dishonour of all five cheques. It is submitted that the dishonour of each cheque gives rise to a separate and distinct cause of action. As per Section 219 of the Cr.P.C. (now Section 242 of the BNSS), only three offences of the same kind committed within a year can be tried together, and not beyond. Ground No.B: It is submitted that the cheques were not issued towards discharge of any subsisting or existing or any other liability for being presented towards discharge of the subsisting liability or any other liability. As such, the 3 2nd respondent could not have filed a complaint under Section 138 of NI Act. It is further submitted that the State Government, having noticed the difficulties faced by the farmers, has issued G.O.Rt.No.117 dated 01.10.2011, and Clause (8) of the said G.O constituted a District Level Committee which would arrive at the compensation due and payable to the farmers who have lost the yield and suffered financially on account of non-generation of the seeds supplied by the seed manufacturing company. 4. It is further submitted that no such effort was made by the 2nd respondent to arrive at compensation due and payable to the farmers who suffered loss. On these grounds, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that C.C.No.717 of 2022 deserves to be quashed. 5. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent submits that the petitioners have executed an undertaking to compensate the farmers and also issued a letter of undertaking dated 04.01.2016, and further handed over five post- dated cheques in favour of the complainant, each for an amount of Rs.6,00,000/-. It is further submitted in the complaint that the complainant has paid an amount of Rs.30,00,000/- to the farmers on the assurance given by the petitioners that the cheques would be honoured. 6. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in Crl.P.No.5909 of 2023. The Karnataka High Court, while considering the criminal petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of a complaint filed under Section 138 of the NI Act, had an occasion 4 to deal with an identical case where a single complaint was filed for dishonour of five cheques. The learned Judge, after relying on judgments of various Courts including that of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, has held that such a complaint is maintainable. 7. Considering the provisions of law and the nature of the complaint, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu vs. Syed Babalal has held that the filing of multiple complaints for several cheques issued could be consolidated and transferred to the Court where the first complaint is filed. Similarly, the Delhi High Court in Unique Infoways Pvt. Ltd. vs. M/s. MPS Telecom Pvt. Ltd. held that Section 220(1) of Cr.P.C. (now Section 243 of the BNSS) permits the filing of a single complaint for multiple maintainable cheques. 8. Considering the submissions Section 243 of BNSS reads as follows: Section 243. Trial for more than one offence. (1) If, in one series of acts so connected together as to form the same transaction, more offences than one are committed by the same person, he may be charged with, and tried at one trial for, every such offence. (2) When a person charged with one or more offences of criminal breach of trust or dishonest misappropriation of property as provided in sub-section (2) of section 235 or in sub-section (1) of section 242, is accused of committing, for the purpose of facilitating or concealing the commission of that offence or those offences, one or more offences of falsification of accounts, he may be charged with, and tried at one trial for, every such offence. 5 (3) If the acts alleged constitute an offence falling within two or more separate definitions of any law in force for the time being by which offences are defined or punished, the person accused of them may be charged with, and tried at one trial for, each of such offences. (4) If several acts, of which one or more than one would by itself or themselves constitute an offence, constitute when combined a different offence, the person accused of them may be charged with, and tried at one trial for the offence constituted by such acts when combined, and for any offence constituted by any one, or more, of such acts. (5) Nothing contained in this section shall affect section 9 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Illustrations to sub-section (1) (a) A rescues B, a person in lawful custody, and in so doing causes grievous hurt to C, a constable in whose custody B was. A may be charged with, and convicted of, offences under sub-section (2) of section 121 and section 263 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. (b) A commits house-breaking by day with intent to commit rape, and commits, in the house so entered, rape with B's wife. A may be separately charged with, and convicted of, offences under section 64 and sub-section (3) of section 331 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. (c) A has in his possession several seals, knowing them to be counterfeit and intending to use them for the purpose of committing several forgeries punishable under section 337 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. A may be separately charged with, and convicted of, the possession of each seal under sub-section (2) of section 341 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. (d) With intent to cause injury to B, A institutes a criminal proceeding against him, knowing that there is no just or lawful ground for such proceeding, and also falsely accuses B of having committed an offence, knowing that 6 there is no just or lawful ground for such charge. A may be separately charged with, and convicted of, two offences under section 248 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. (e) A, with intent to cause injury to B, falsely accuses him of having committed an offence, knowing that there is no just or lawful ground for such charge. On the trial, A gives false evidence against B, intending thereby to cause B to be convicted of a capital offence. A may be separately charged with, and convicted of, offences under sections 230 and 248 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. (f) A, with six others, commits the offences of rioting, grievous hurt and assaulting a public servant endeavouring in the discharge of his duty as such to suppress the riot. A may be separately charged with, and convicted of, offences under sub-section (2) of section 117, sub-section (2) of section 191 and section 195 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. (g) A threatens B, C and D at the same time with injury to their persons with intent to cause alarm to them. A may be separately charged with, and convicted of, each of the three offences under sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The separate charges referred to in illustrations (a) to (g), respectively, may be tried at the same time. Illustrations to sub-section (3) (h) A wrongfully strikes B with a cane. A may be separately charged with, and convicted of, offences under sub-section (2) of section 115 and section 131 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. (i) Several stolen sacks of corn are made over to A and B, who knew they are stolen property, for the purpose of concealing them. A and B thereupon voluntarily assist each other to conceal the sacks at the bottom of a grain-pit. A and B may be separately charged with, and convicted of, offences under sub-sections (2) and (5) of section 317 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 7 (j) A exposes her child with the knowledge that she is thereby likely to cause its death. The child dies in consequence of such exposure. A may be separately charged with, and convicted of, offences under sections 93 and 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. (k) A dishonestly uses a forged document as genuine evidence, in order to convict B, a public servant, of an offence under section 201 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. A may be separately charged with, and convicted of, offences under section 233 and sub-section (2) of section 340 (read with section 337) of that Sanhita. Illustration to sub-section (4) (l) A commits robbery on B, and in doing so voluntarily causes hurt to him. A may be separately charged with, and convicted of, offences under sub-section (2) of section 115 and sub-sections (2) and (4) of section 309 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 9. This Court is of the considered opinion that the complaint filed by the 2nd respondent is maintainable, and C.C.No.717 of 2022 cannot be quashed on the grounds raised by the petitioners. However, it is left open for the petitioners to raise all available grounds before the Trial Court insofar as the issue of liability is concerned. 10. With these observations, this Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 27.03.2025 PNS 8