AARTI ENGINEERING COMPANY Vs. KANHAIYALAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by the order dated 24-3-2003 passed in Criminal Case no. 1267/2003 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Durg, whereby taking cognizance against the petitioners alongwith another co-accused vinod Mandhana under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments act, 1881, (for short, "the Act") the petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Cr. PC for quashing the said order and all subsequent proceedings against the petitioners.

(2.) ONE partnership firm - Aarti Engineer Company, was constituted on 1-4-1994 comprising partners namely Kanhaiyalal Mandhana, Vinod mandhana and Smt. Suman Mandhana for carrying the business under the name and style of Aarti Engineering Company. Subsequently, the firm was reconstituted on 1-4-1998 wherein one of the partners namely Vinod mandhana took retirement and new partner joined in the said firm. Vinod mandhana issued a cheque dated 1-10-2002 bearing No. 357940 of Canara bank, Itwari, Nagpur for Rs. 20,00,000/- to be paid to respondent No. 1 -Vijay Dwivedi. The said cheque, on being submitted for encashment, was bounced and returned to respondent No. 1 with letter dated 15-10-2002 issued by the Canara Bank assigning reasons that no sufficient fund was in balance in the account and the payment was stopped by the drawer. Respondent No. 1 issued legal notice on 8-1-2003 to the petitioners and an other co-accused Vinod Mandhana and thereafter as no amount has been paid to him, he filed a complaint against all the petitioners and co-accused vinod Mandhana.

(3.) RESPONDENT No. 1 in his complaint alleged that petitioner Nos. 2 to 5 and Vinod Mandhana who are the partners of firm M/s. Aarti engineering Company and are well-known to him, took a loan of Rs. 20,00,000/-for their business and to repay the same Vinod Mandhana one of the partners in the capacity of partner of firm M/s. Aarti Engineering Company, issued a Cheque No. 357940, dated 1-10-2002 of Canara Bank and received back all the documents executed by petitioners and Vinod Mandhana for taking the loan. The said cheque was tendered by respondent No. 1 to his bankers - Bhilai Nagarik Sahakari Bank Ltd. , Bhilai Nagar on 10-10-2002, who vide their letter dated 3-1-2003 returned the cheque being bounced. Therefore, respondent No. 1 demanding the amount sent a legal notice to the petitioners and Vinod Mandhana and thereafter when the debt was not made good, filed a complaint under various Sections of the IPC and also under Section 138 of the said Act, in the Court of Chief Judicial magistrate, Durg, who after recording necessary evidence, considering complainant and documents, registered a case vide order dated 24-3-2003 against all the petitioners and Vinod Mandhana under Section 138 of the said Act and thereafter the proceeding in his Court continued.