Bombay High Court
PRADEEP SAVLA AND ORSversusM/S. PREMIER CORE INDUSTRIES AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SHIVKUMAR DIGE
Holding
The Court held that the issue process order was erroneous because the applicants had resigned before the cheques were issued and therefore quashed the order.
Summary
The applicants, former directors of Premier Core Industries, filed five criminal applications seeking to quash an issue process order dated 30 July 2019 that had been issued against them for the dishonour of cheques. They contended that they had resigned from their directorships between May and September 2018, i.e., before any of the cheques in question were issued in 2018‑2019. The trial magistrate had ignored the resignation dates and proceeded with the issue process. The High Court examined the resignation dates verified by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs and held that the applicants could not be held liable for the cheque dishonour as they were no longer directors at the relevant times. Consequently, the Court quashed the issue process order and directed the trial court to expedite the trial, allowing all the applications.
Issues considered
- Whether former directors who resigned before the issuance of a cheque can be held criminally liable for its dishonour.
- Whether the issue process order issued against the applicants is valid in view of their resignation dates.
- Whether the fact of resignation is a matter of evidence that must be proved before proceeding with criminal proceedings.
Subjects
- director resignation
- cheque dishonour
- issue process order
- quash
- criminal application
- High Court of Bombay
- Corporate liability
Judgment
16-APL-938-2021.doc
Rohit Ghuge
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.938 OF 2021
Pradeep Savla And Ors … Applicants
Versus
M OF s. Premier Core Industries and anr. … Respondents
with
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.337 OF 2020
Pradeep Savla And Ors
Versus
M OF s. Premier Core Industries (a Partnership Firm)
with
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1199 OF 2021
Pradeep Savla And Ors
Versus
M OF s. Premier Core Industries and anr.
with
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.947 OF 2021
Pradeep Savla And Ors
Versus
M OF s. Premier Core Industries
Through Its Partner
Mrs Benny Dicta A Rasquina and anr.
with
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.949 OF 2021
Pradeep Savla And Ors
Versus
M OF s Premier Core Industries
Through Its Partner Mrs Benny Dicta A Rasquina and anr.
Page 1 of 4
16-APL-938-2021.doc
Rohit Ghuge
_________________________________________________________________
Mr.Niket Harit a/w M. Kashif Wahedna i/b Manoj Harit & Co., Advocate
for the Applicant in all matters.
Mr. Dhananjay Bhosale a/w Mithun Kaire, Advocate for Respondent No. 1
in all matters.
Mr. S. S. Pednekar, APP for Respondent-State.
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 4th MARCH, 2026.
P.C. :
1. The issue involved in these five applications are the same.
Hence, I am deciding all these applications by this common order.
2. It is contention of the learned counsel for the Applicant’s that
the applicants ceased to be Directors of the company in the year 2018 i.e.
before issuance of the cheque. But, the learned Trial Court did not consider
this fact and passed issue process order, which is erroneous and requested
to allow the applications.
3. The learned counsel for the Respondent No. 2 strongly objected
to allow the applications on the ground that whether the applicants
resigned from the directorship or not is part of evidence, which has to be
proved by way of evidence. The learned trial court has passed a well
reasoned order and requested to reject the applications.
4. Learned APP submits that appropriate order be passed.
5. I have heard all learned counsel. Perused documents produced
on record.
6. It appears from record that in Complaint No. CC/259/2019, the
date of issuance of the cheque is 15.03.2019, whereas the date of
dishonour of the cheque is 16.03.2019 and Applicant No.1 had resigned on
20.09.2018, Applicant No.2 resigned on 25.06.2018, Applicant No.3
Page 2 of 4
16-APL-938-2021.doc
Rohit Ghuge
resigned on 30.05.2018, and Applicant No. 4 resigned on 09.05.2018 i.e
before issuance of the cheque. The Ministry of Corporate Affairs, who is
supervisory body confirms the dates of resignation of the applicants.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION APL/337/2020
Sr. Date of Cheque Date of Resignation Complaint
No. No.
1 15/02/2019 & 16/02/2019 20/09/2018 (APP. No.1) CC/222/2019
(Date of Dishonour of the said 25/06/2018 (App. No.2)
Cheque) 30/05/2018 (App. No.3)
15/07/2018 (App. No.4)
Alongwith
CRIMINAL APPLICATION APL/938/2021
Sr. Date of Cheque Date of Resignation Complaint
No. No.
1 15/10/2018 & 16/10/2018 20/09/2018 (APP. No.1) CC/475/2018
(Date of Dishonour of the said 25/06/2018 (App. No.2)
Cheque) 30/05/2018 (App. No.3)
15/07/2018 (App. No.4)
Alongwith
CRIMINAL APPLICATION APL/947/2021
Sr. Date of Cheque Date of Resignation Complaint
No. No.
1 15/11/2018 & 17/11/2018 20/09/2018 (APP. No.1) CC/31/2019
(Date of Dishonour of the said 25/06/2018 (App. No.2)
Cheque) 30/05/2018 (App. No.3)
15/07/2018 (App. No.4)
Alongwith
CRIMINAL APPLICATION APL/949/2021
Sr. Date of Cheque Date of Resignation Complaint
No. No.
1 15/12/2018 & 17/12/2018 20/09/2018 (APP. No.1) CC/73/2019
(Date of Dishonour of the said 25/06/2018 (App. No.2)
Page 3 of 4
16-APL-938-2021.doc
Rohit Ghuge
Cheque) 30/05/2018 (App. No.3)
15/07/2018 (App. No.4)
Alongwith
CRIMINAL APPLICATION APL/1199/2021
FOR QUASHING OF ISSUE PROCESS
Sr. Date of Cheque Date of Resignation Complaint
No. No.
1 15/03/2019 & 15/03/2019 20/09/2018 (APP. No.1) CC/259/2019
(Date of Dishonour of the said 25/06/2018 (App. No.2)
Cheque) 30/05/2018 (App. No.3)
15/07/2018 (App. No.4)
The documents of Ministry of Corporate Affairs shows that the
applicants have resigned from the said company before the date of
issuance of the cheque, but this fact is not considered by this learned
Magistrate before passing issue process order.
7. Considering these facts, I pass following order.
ORDER
(i) All Applications are allowed and disposed of.
(ii) The issue process order’s dated 30.07.2019 passed by
learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 27th Court, Mulund,
Mumbai against all applicants are quashed and set aside.
(iii) Considering the submissions of both learned counsel, the
trial Court is requested to expedite the trial.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 4 of 4
Checking your session…