ORDER : M.R. Shah, J. As common question of law and facts arise and are between the same parties, all these applications are disposed of by this common judgment and order. [2.0] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9644/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.82/2002 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.1] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9645/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.83/2002 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.2] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9646/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.84/2002 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.3] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9647/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.85/2002 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.4] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9648/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.86/2002 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.5] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9649/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.238/2001 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.6] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9650/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.239/2001 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.7] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9651/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.240/2001 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.8] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9652/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.241/2001 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.9] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9653/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.242/2001 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.10] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9654/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.290/2001 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.11] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9655/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.291/2001 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.12] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9656/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.607/2002 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.13] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9657/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.608/2002 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.14] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9658/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.866/2002 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.15] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9659/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.867/2002 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.16] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9660/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.868/2002 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.17] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9661/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.982/2002 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.18] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9662/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.983/2002 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.19] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9663/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.984/2002 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [2.20] Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.9664/2003 has been preferred by the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 to quash and set aside the impugned complaint being Criminal Case No.1064/2002 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor which has been filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act"). [3.0] The aforesaid complaints/criminal cases have been instituted/filed by respondent No.1 herein - original complainant in the Court of learned JMFC, Dakor against one M/s. Cureaim Pharmaceuticals and others inclusive of the applicants for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Neotiable Instruments Act for dishonour of respective cheques in question which were admittedly signed by original accused No.3 - Sunilbhai Rambhai Patel. It was the case on behalf of the original complainant that on settlement of accounts between partners with respect to the partnership firm M/s. Cureaim Pharmaceuticals, accounts came to be settled and an amount of Rs. 49,75,000/was due and payable to the original complainant for which a Memorandum of Understanding was entered into between the partners which was signed by the complainant and the original accused Nos.3, 4 & 5 and under the said MOU, original accused No.3 accepted the liability to pay the said amount to the original complainant and he agreed to pay Rs. 35,50,000/to the original complainant, on behalf of the partnership firm and for which said Sunilbhai Patel - original accused No.3 gave the aforesaid cheques in question to the original complainant which came to be dishonored. It was further alleged in the said complaints that despite the statutory notices under Section 138 of the Neotiable Instruments Act, the amount under the cheques which came to be dishonored were not paid and therefore, respondent No.1 herein - original complainant filed the aforesaid complaints/criminal cases against the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5. That the learned Magistrate issued the summonses against the applicants also for offence punishable under section 138 of the Neotiable Instruments Act and therefore, the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 have preferred the present Criminal Miscellaneous Applications under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to quash and set aside the impugned complaints/criminal cases qua them. That the learned Magistrate issued the summonses against the applicants also for offence punishable under section 138 of the Neotiable Instruments Act and therefore, the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 have preferred the present Criminal Miscellaneous Applications under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to quash and set aside the impugned complaints/criminal cases qua them. [4.0] Shri B.M. Mangukiya, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicants has vehemently submitted that as such the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 have not committed offence as alleged under Section 138 of the Neotiable Instruments Act for dishonor of cheques in question. It is submitted that admittedly the cheques in question have been signed by the original accused No.3 in his individual capacity and the cheques in question were not given to the complainant by accused No.1 - partnership firm or as a partner of the partnership firm. It is submitted that the said cheques were issued in his individual capacity accepting the liability to pay the aforesaid amount under the MOU and therefore, the applicants cannot be held liable for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Neotiable Instruments Act which is alleged to have been committed by other accused persons, more particularly, original accused No.3, who is signatory to the cheques. Shri Mangukiya, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicants has heavily relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sabitha Ramamurthy v. R.B.S. Channabasavardhya reported in (2006) 10 SCC 581 as well as the decision of this Court in the case of Mahendrakumar Tulsibhai Patel v. State of Gujarat and Anr. reported in 2008 (1) GLH 196 in support of his prayer to quash and set aside the impugned complaints/criminal cases qua the applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5. Making above submissions and relying upon above decisions, it is requested to allow the present Criminal Miscellaneous Applications. [5.0] Shri Ashish Dagli, learned advocate has appeared on behalf of respondent No.1 - original complainant and has opposed the present applications. It is submitted by him that as such under the MOU which was signed by the applicants also on settlement of the accounts of accused No.1 - partnership firm, it was agreed that a sum of Rs. 49,75,000/was due and payable out of which Rs. It is submitted by him that as such under the MOU which was signed by the applicants also on settlement of the accounts of accused No.1 - partnership firm, it was agreed that a sum of Rs. 49,75,000/was due and payable out of which Rs. 15,75,000/was agreed to be paid on or before 31.01.2001 and the balance amount of Rs. 34,00,000/was required to be paid out of which 25 cheques in question were issued total amounting to Rs. 15,75,000/which came to be dishonored. It is submitted that as the applicants were also party to the said MOU, the applicants can be held liable for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Neotiable Instruments Act for dishonor of cheques which were issued/given to the complainant under the MOU dated 19.01.2001. It is further submitted that as such original accused No.3 accepted the liability and issued the cheques for and on behalf of original accused No.1 - partnership firm and therefore also, for dishonor of the said cheques, the applicants being partners can be held liable for the offence under section 138 of the Neotiable Instruments Act. Therefore, it is requested to dismiss the present applications. [5.1] Shri Dabhi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has requested to pass appropriate order in the facts and circumstances of the case. [6.0] Heard the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respective parties at length. At the outset it is required to be noted that the impugned complaints/criminal cases have been filed for the offence under Section 138 of the Neotiable Instruments Act for dishonor of cheques which were admittedly signed, issued and given by original accused No.3 - Sunilbhai Patel. It appears that the said cheques were issued by him under the MOU dated 19.01.2001 under which on settlement of the accounts of original accused No.1 - partnership firm, M/s. Cureaim Pharmaceuticals, original accused No.3 accepted the liability to pay the amount to the complainant, due and payable on settlement of accounts of the partnership firm. It appears that the said cheques were issued by him under the MOU dated 19.01.2001 under which on settlement of the accounts of original accused No.1 - partnership firm, M/s. Cureaim Pharmaceuticals, original accused No.3 accepted the liability to pay the amount to the complainant, due and payable on settlement of accounts of the partnership firm. Therefore, when the cheques in question came to be dishonored for which the complaints have been filed are admittedly signed by original accused No.3 accepting personal liability to pay the said amount to original complainant on settlement of accounts of partnership firm and when it is not the case on behalf of the complainant that the said cheques have been issued from the accounts maintained by the partnership firm and/or that the same were given by the partnership firm, for dishonor of the said cheques which were admittedly signed by original accused No.3 in his individual capacity, it cannot be said that the applicants have committed any offence under Section 138 of the Neotiable Instruments Act. The applicants are neither signatory to the cheques nor it is the case on behalf of the complainant that the cheques in question have been drawn on account maintained by the applicant - original accused Nos.4 and 5. As such the controversy in question is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Mahendrakumar Tulsibhai Patel (Supra) and in similar set of facts and circumstances, this Court held that a person who is neither the signatory of cheque nor the account holder, can be held liable for the offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The decision in the case of Mahendrakumar Tulsibhai Patel (Supra) squarely covers to the facts of the present case. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and the decision of this Court in the case of Mahendrakumar Tulsibhai Patel (Supra), all the present applications deserve to be allowed and the impugned complaints/criminal cases qua the present applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 deserve to be quashed and set aside. However, the same shall be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the original complainant against other accused persons. However, the same shall be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the original complainant against other accused persons. [7.0] In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, all the present applications succeed and the impugned complaints/criminal cases being Criminal Case Nos.82/2002 to 86/2002, 238/2001 to 242/2001, 290/2001 & 291/2001, 607/2002 & 608/2002, 866/2002 to 868/2002, 982/2002 to 984/2002 and 1064/2002, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dakor are hereby quashed and set aside so far as applicants - original accused No.4 viz. Harishbhai Laxmidas Patel and original accused No.5 viz. Rajnikant Hiralal Rai are concerned and the orders passed by the learned JMFC issuing process against the present applicants in the aforesaid complaints/criminal cases for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Neotiable Instruments Act are hereby quashed and set aside so far as the present applicants - original accused Nos.4 and 5 are concerned. However, the same shall be without prejudice to rights and contentions of the original complainant against other accused persons. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent in each of the applications. Application Allowed.