YOGESH RANA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.), the petitioner/applicant has sought quashing of the criminal proceedings in complaint case no.1402/2010, M/s Chaudhary Suppliers v. Rana Traders, under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act). Heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the material available in file.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on 21.7.2010 respondent no.2 M/s Chaudhary Suppliers through Hemant Chaudhary filed a complaint before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Dehradun against the applicant and others alleging therein that the complainant was carrying on his business of stone, sand, concrete, etc. under the name and style M/s Chaudhary Suppliers and the applicant and his associates purchased above material of ` 24,52,895/- from him on different dates in the year 2009. It is alleged that on 17.5.2009, ` 20,35,173/- of the complainant was due on the applicant. After making requests several times, applicant Yogesh Rana and co-accused Adesh Rana, issued a cheque bearing no.437705 dated 16.1.2010 of ` 5,60,175/- in favour of the complainant. The cheque was signed by the applicant Yogesh Rana and co-accused Adesh Rana. It is alleged that firstly on 16.1.2010, then on 25.1.2010 and lastly on 10.5.2010, the complainant presented the said cheque in the bank, but the same was dishonoured due to insufficient funds. Thereafter, the complainant sent a registered notice through his counsel to the applicant and co-accused requesting to refund the amount within 15 days, which was also served upon them. But even after service of the notice, the applicant did not refund the money of the complainant. With these averments, respondent no.2 filed the present complaint before Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun, against the applicant and others, which was registered as Case No.1402/2010 under Section 138 of N.I. Act. The complainant in support of his case got himself examined u/s 200 Cr.P.C. and also filed the copies of original cheque, memorandum slip, notice, etc. After hearing learned counsel for the complainant and perusing the entire material available, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun vide order dated 12.8.2010, took the cognizance of the offence and summoned the applicant and co-accused. Feeling aggrieved by the said order dated 12.8.2010, the applicant has preferred the present C482 application before this Court.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the cheque in question was never issued or signed by the applicant and he has been falsely implicated in the case. I do not find force in the argument put forth by learned counsel for the applicant. From a perusal of the contents of the complaint and after going through other papers available in file, I am of the view that prima facie a case under Section 138 of N.I. Act is made out against the applicant.