P K BAJAJ Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIDE this common order, Crl.M.C. No.646/2012 and 647/2012 are being disposed of as identical pleas have been raised in both the petitions in respect of different dishonoured cheques i.e. cheques No.356793 & 356794 (subject matter of Crl.M.C. No.646/2012) and cheque No.356795 (subject matter of Crl.M.C. No.647/2012).

(2.) THE present petitions under Section 482 CrPC have been filed impugning the order of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Criminal Revision No.37/2011 and 38/2011 vide which prayer of petitioners to quash the complaint and summoning order was declined.

(3.) THE complaint case No.356/2011 has been filed by Satish Miglani against the petitioners herein in respect of dishonoured cheques No. 356793 & 356794 and the complaint case No.357/2011 has been filed by Neelam Miglani, wife of Satish Miglani against the petitioners herein in respect of dishonoured cheque No. 356795. THE facts of both the complaints cases have already been given in detail in the impugned orders and the same are not being reproduced while disposing of these petitions.