- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7342 CRL.P No. 324 of 2018 C/W CRL.P No. 6750 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 324 OF 2018 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6750 OF 2019 IN CRL.P No. 324/2018 BETWEEN: 1. SMT.SANGEETA BUBNA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, W/O SRI. PRASHANT BUBNA, R/AT GOLABARI BANKIPUR, PATNA - 800 020. 2. SRI. ARUN KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, S/O LATE SRI. K.N.PANDIT, R/AT GOLABARI, BANKIPUR, PATNA - 800 020. 3. SRI. PRASHANT BUBNA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, S/O LATE SRI RAM AVATAR BUBNA, R/AT GOLABARI, BANKIPUR, PETITIONER NOS.1 AND 2 ARE RESIDING AT PATNA, KOLKATA - 800 020. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI.SHUBHAM MORE, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.DEEPAKAR LIVINGSTON, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. ADITYA BIRLA NUVO LIMITED, HAVING ITS GARMENT DIVISION AT Digitally signed by SWAPNA V Location: high court of karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7342 CRL.P No. 324 of 2018 C/W CRL.P No. 6750 of 2019 M/S MADHURA FASHION & LIFESTYLE AND ITS OFFICE AT PLOT NO.5B, REGENT GATEWAY, DODDANAKUNDI VILLAGE, KIADB INDUSTRIAL AREA, ITPL ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 048. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY, MR. VIJAYAKUMAR. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.VARUN SHARMA, ADVOCATE (ABSENT)) THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.51958/2016 ON THE FILE OF XIV ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED. IN CRL.P NO. 6750/2019 BETWEEN: SMT.SANGEETHA BUBNA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, W/O SRI. PRASHANTH BUBNA, DIRECTOR, M/S.ISHA DISTRIBUTION HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITED, DIGAMBAR PLACE, DS 24 B, KANKERBAGH COLONY, NEAR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA, PATNA - 800 020. NOW HAVING OFFICE AT 6, RUSSELL STREET, KOLKATA - 700 071. R/A CD-203, SALT LAKE, KOLKATTA - 700 071. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI.SHUBHAM MORE, ADVOCATE) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7342 CRL.P No. 324 of 2018 C/W CRL.P No. 6750 of 2019 AND: M/S. ADITYA BIRLA NUVO LIMITED, HAVING ITS GARMENT DIVISION AT M/S MADHURA FASHION & LIFESTYLE AND ITS OFFICE AT PLOT NO.5B, REGENT GATEWAY, DODDANAKUNDI VILLAGE, KIADB INDUSTRIAL AREA, ITPL ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 048. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY, MR.VIJAY KUMAR. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI.VARUN SHARMA, ADVOCATE (ABSENT)) THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 19.08/.2019 PASSED ON THE IMPLEADING APPLICATION IN C.C.NO.51958/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE LVII ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED NOW AT XIV ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE MAYO HALL UNIT, BENGALURU. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL COMMON ORDER The petitioners being accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crl.P.No.324/2018 being are seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them in C.C. No.51958/2016 - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:7342 CRL.P No. 324 of 2018 C/W CRL.P No. 6750 of 2019 pending on the file of the learned XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru for the offence under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'N.I. Act'). 2. Petitioner being accused No.1 in Crl.P. 6250/19 is seeking to quash the order dated 19.08.2019 passed on the impleading application in C.C. No.51958/2016 pending on the file learned LVII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru for the offence under section 138 of N.I. Act. 3. Brief facts of the case are that: the respondent being complainant filed the private complaint in PCR No.53814/2015 before the Trial Court against accused Nos.1 to 3 alleging commission of the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I Act. The Trial Court took cognizance of the offence and issued summons to the accused. Accordingly, C.C.No. 51958/2016 came to be registered against accused Nos.1 to 3 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:7342 CRL.P No. 324 of 2018 C/W CRL.P No. 6750 of 2019 4. During pendency of the criminal case, accused No.4 being the Company by name M/s. Isha Distribution House Pvt. Ltd., came to be impleaded. Accused Nos. 1 to 3 have filed Crl.P.No.324/2018 seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them while accused No.1-the Director who is representing M/s. Isha Distribution House Pvt. Ltd., is seeking to quash the impugned order dated 19.08.2017 allowing the impleading applicant to implead Company as accused No.4. 5. It is the contention of the complainant before the Trial Court that accused No.1 being the Director of accused No.4 issued the cheque in question in discharge of legally enforceable debt. On presentation, the cheque was dishonoured and the notice was issued to the accused. Inspite of service of notice, they have not repaid the cheque amount and thereby, committed the offence as stated above. Therefore, the complainant requested the Trial Court to take cognizance of the offence. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:7342 CRL.P No. 324 of 2018 C/W CRL.P No. 6750 of 2019 6. Even though initially private complaint came to be filed only against the Directors-accused Nos.1 to 3, subsequently, it is stated that the Company is also arrayed as accused as required under Section 141 of N.I. Act. Now, accused Nos.1 to 3 are before this Court seeking to quash the criminal proceedings and also to quash the order dated 19.08.2019 allowing the impleading application. 7. Heard Sri Shubham More, learned counsel for Sri Deepakar Livingston, learned counsel for the petitioner. Inspite of service of notice, the respondent remained unrepresented. Perused the materials on record. 8. In view of the contentions urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner and on going through the materials on record, the points that would arise for my consideration is: (i) "Whether the Petitioners has made out any grounds to allow Crl.P.No.324/2018 - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:7342 CRL.P No. 324 of 2018 C/W CRL.P No. 6750 of 2019 and to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them?" (ii) "Whether the Petitioner has made out any grounds to allowCrl.P.No.6750/2019 and to quash the order dated 19.08.2019 passed in C.C.No.51958/2016 on the file of LVII Addl. CMM Court, Bengaluru?" My answer to point No.1 is partly in the affirmative and for point No.2 in the Negative for the following: REASONS 9. Even according to the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.1 in Crl.P. No.6750/2019, she is the Director and authorized signatory to accused No.4- M/s.Isha Distribution House Pvt. Ltd., Even it is admitted that the cheque in question pertains to accused No.4- Company and it bears the signature of accused No.1, it is the contention of the petitioner-Accused No.1 that the cheque was misused by the complainant. A mini trial cannot be held at this stage regarding such defence proposed to be taken by the accused. Said contentions - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:7342 CRL.P No. 324 of 2018 C/W CRL.P No. 6750 of 2019 could be the defence to be taken before the trial Court and the same cannot be a ground for quashing the criminal proceedings. 10. The next contention taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.1 is that accused No.4 could not have been impleaded by the trial Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner was not in a position to support his contention as to why the Company could not have been impleaded. Admittedly, accused No.4 is a Private Limited Company of which accused No.1 the Directors and the authorized signatory to represent accused No.4. The legal notice was served on her. Under these circumstances, I do not find any reason to find fault with the impugned order dated 19.08.2019 passed by the trial Court allowing the application for impleading the applicant as accused No.4. On going through the impugned order, the trial Court has referred to the contention taken by the complainant at the initial stage by referring to the name of the Company and issuance of the - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:7342 CRL.P No. 324 of 2018 C/W CRL.P No. 6750 of 2019 cheque on behalf of the Company by accused No.1. Under such circumstances, I do not find any reason to quash the order dated 19.08.2019 passed on the impleading application in C.C.No.51958/2016. 11. The materials on record discloses that accused Nos.2 and 3 who are petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 in Crl.P.No.324/2018 are the Directors of accused No.4, but admittedly they have not issued any cheque and they are not the drawers of the cheque. When accused No.1 was authorised signatory representing accused No.4 as its Director, I am of the opinion that Criminal proceedings against accused Nos.2 and 3 is liable to be quashed. 12. The Criminal proceedings against accused No.4- Company and accused No.1 as its Director and authorised signatory, who is the drawer of the cheque in question are liable to be prosecuted. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against accused Nos.2 and 3 who are petitioner Nos.2 and 3 in Crl.P.No.324/2018 is liable to be quashed. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:7342 CRL.P No. 324 of 2018 C/W CRL.P No. 6750 of 2019 13. Accordingly I answer point No.1 partly in the affirmative and point No.2 in the negative and proceed to pass the following:- ORDER (i) Criminal Petition No.324/2018 is allowed in part. (ii) Criminal Petition No.6750/2019 is dismissed. (iii) Criminal proceedings in C.C.No. 51958/16 on the file of the learned XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, for the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act as petitioners-Accused Nos.2 and 3 is hereby quashed. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE PSJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26