SACHIN SUNEJA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C the petitioner has assailed an order dated 3rd September 2010 whereby an application under Section 263(g) Cr.P.C of the petitioner was dismissed He has also sought quashing of the criminal complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act made by the complainant.

(2.) AFTER summoning order of learned MM, the petitioner on a complaint of the respondent/ complainant under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act for dishonour of cheque, the petitioner made an application under Section 263(g) of Cr.P.C stating therein that the payment of the cheque was stopped by him and it was not dishonoured on account of insufficiency of funds. The cheques in question were issued as a security and were misused by the complainant. The other defence taken was that the notice issued by the complainant was beyond the period of limitation. The learned trial court considered the application of the petitioner and found that the evidence in the case was going on and the matter was listed for cross examination of witnesses. As far as serving of legal notice within the statutory period was concerned, the trial court observed that the debit advice was dated 31st October 2009 and the legal notice was served on 30th November 2009. Thus, the notice was absolutely within the period of limitation and he listed the case for P.E.