SIDDHARTH DUGGAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C.'), the petitioner seeks following reliefs:

(2.) The factual background of the present case, in brief, is that respondent no. 2/complainant 'M/s. Rakesh Press' had filed a complaint under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ("NI Act') whereby it was stated that the complainant was engaged in the business of printing books, magazines and other periodicals for respondent no. 3/accused i.e. 'M/s. Duggals Print House', a sole proprietorship concern, and as on 2/7/2014, there was an outstanding balance to the tune of Rs.11,08,802.00 against respondent no. 3. It was alleged that towards the said liability, the sole proprietor of respondent no. 3 i.e. Mr Siddharth Duggal (petitioner herein)had acknowledged his liability as on 31/3/2016 and letters were also exchanged between the complainant and the accused. Eventually, as alleged, a cheque bearing no. 166360 dtd. 17/8/2016 of Rs.2,00,000.00 drawn on Union Bank of India,Rajouri Garden branch, New Delhi was issued towards discharge of liability of respondent no. 3 as part-payment and the petitioner had assured respondent no. 2 that he would clear the outstanding dues. However, upon presentation of the cheque, the same had got dishonoured vide return memo dtd. 19/8/2016 with remarks 'Account Closed/Transferred To'. Thereafter, respondent no. 2 had issued legal notice calling upon the accused persons to make the payment of cheque amount and upon their failure to do so, the present complaint case was filed before Patiala House Courts, New Delhi on 20/10/2016.

(3.) Pursuant to filing of complaint case, the petitioner was summoned vide order dtd. 20/10/2016, and notice under Sec. 251 Cr.P.C. was framed against him on 6/3/2018. Thereafter, the complainant/respondent no. 2 was examined and discharged on 2/7/2018 and the statement of petitioner was recorded on 5/7/2018 under Sec. 313of Cr.P.C.On 23/7/2018, the petitioner had moved two applications before the learned Magistrate, the first application being filed under Sec. 243 read with Sec. 293 of Cr.P.C. read with Sec. 45/73 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 for referring the cheque in question to FSL,and second application being for summoning of certain defence witnesses. However, learned Magistrate vide order dtd. 17/10/2019 had dismissed both the applications. The relevant portions of the said order read as under: