MOHD SALEEM ANSARI Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. KC Tewari, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State. None appeared for the respondent no. 2.

(2.) By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, CrPC), the petitioner has prayed for quashing the summoning order dated 1.3.2006 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 97/2006 (New Number 750 of 2006) Abdul Mukhtar v. Mohd. Saleem Ansari under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 420 IPC now pending in the Court of CJM, Pithoragarh.

(3.) Facts, in brief, are that the respondent no. 2 Abdul Mukhtar lodged a complaint against the petitioner stating that the petitioner was a tenant in his house in Pithoragarh. On 28.9.2005, the petitioner for his personal work had taken a loan of Rs. 55,000/- from the complainant and had promised that he would return this amount after two months. When the petitioner did not return the aforesaid amount to the complainant after the aforesaid promised period of two months, then the complainant contacted the petitioner, who gave the complainant a cheque of Rs. 55,000/- dated 30.11.2005 drawn at Bank of India, Almora. When the said cheque was presented before the bank, it was dishonoured on 2.12.2005 for want of sufficient fund. The complainant again presented the said cheque before the bank, which was again dishonoured on 21.1.2006 with the endorsement "Stop Payment". Thereafter the complainant issued a legal notice to the petitioner through the Advocate under Section 138(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act which was received by the petitioner on 6.2.2006, but the petitioner neither replied to the said notice nor made the payment of Rs. 55,000/- to the complainant. Thereafter the complainant/respondent no. 2 lodged the complaint before the Magistrate. Learned trial court after recording the statement of the complainant under Section 200 CrPC and in view of the other documentary evidence produced by him, came to the conclusion that a prima facie case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 420 IPC is made out against the petitioner and accordingly summoned him vide order dated 1.3.2006.