DILIP KUMAR Vs. SUNITA MITTAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition under Sec. 482 Crimial P.C. is preferred by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 23.08.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Cum Special Judge-II, CBI Rohini Courts: Delhi in criminal revision No. 25/14 wherein the learned ASJ disposed of the petition directing against the order dated 24.05.2014 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate in complaint case No.1555/1/12 titled as Ms. Sunita Mittal Vs. Dilip Kumar @ Raju & Ors.

(2.) The brief facts stated are that Ms. Sunita Mittal present respondent/complainant filed a complaint under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 on 08.08.2012 qua against Dilip Kumar the present petitioner and two other persons, i.e. Iqbal Chand and Vicky Kumar.

(3.) The basis of the complaint under Sec. 138 NI Act was that the petitioner had issued six post dated cheques in favour of the respondent in furtherance of the loan agreement dated 24.10.2011 for Rs. 1,43,00,000.00 (Rupees One Crore Forty Three Lacs Only). However, the said cheques were dishonoured on presentation. Thereafter the respondent issued legal demand notices dated 14.07.2012 to the petitioner and when the petitioner failed to repay the loan amount within 15 days notice period it led to the filing of a complaint case under Sec. 138 NI Act before the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, (N-W), Rohini, Delhi.