MANMOHAN BATRA Vs. TANUJ K. SAHGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner Manmohan Batra (Crl. L.P. 576/2015) had instituted criminal complaint on 18.08.2007 in the court of the Metropolitan Magistrate against the respondents Tanuj K. Sahgal and Poonam Sahgal alleging offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 on the allegations that the latter had failed to make payment inspite of notice of demand issued and served after the return of cheque dated 03.06.2007 for Rs. 4.50 Crores, which had been earlier issued by the respondent in favour of the complainant, with the remarks of the bank "funds insufficient". The other petitioner Inder Raj BatraSons Pvt. Ltd. (Crl. L. P. 667/2015) had similarly instituted another complaint on 18.08.2007 against the same set of respondents with similar allegations qua another cheque dated 02.06.2007 in the sum of Rs. 5.50 Crores. It appears that in both the cases, on the basis of preliminary evidence, the respondents stood summoned as accused and the cases entered trial on the basis of separate notices under section 251 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr. PC) issued and served on the first respondent on 25.09.2010. The said cases (then registered as CC 2109/1/09 and 1896/1/09 respectively), however, came to be dismissed in default on account of non-appearance on the part of the complainant on 06.08.2013 whereby the respondents stood acquitted.

(2.) By the petitions at hand, the complainants seek leave to institute criminal appeals in terms of Sec. 378(4) Cr. PC, the petitions having been presented with applications (Crl. M.A. Nos.10947/201513767/2015) seeking condonation of delay.

(3.) In the course of the proceedings in the first petition, an application (Cr. M.A. 4120/2016) was moved by the petitioner seeking to place on record the new address of the respondents. Since the presence of the respondents has been secured, the said application having served its purpose, stands disposed of.