ANIL KUMAR GUPTA Vs. JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ROORKE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this criminal miscellaneous application moved Under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, the prayer has been made to quash the order of cognizance dated 31.10.2006 passed in the criminal complaint case No. 3002 of 2006, titled as Harpal Singh v. Anil Kumar Gupta. The said complaint was filed in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee for the offence of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (here in after to be referred as the Act). The Magistrate, after recording the statement Under Section 200 Code of Criminal Procedure and having gone through the papers filed in support of the complaint, took cognizance in the matter and issued the summons to the Petitioner asking him to stand for trial. When the Petitioner did not turn up, then consequentially, the arrest warrants were issued on 13.8.2007 and even thereafter on 13.10.2007. Petitioner, instead of putting his appearance, has filed this petition and procured the stay order, as an interim order, till the petition is disposed of on merits. This Court has now heard the learned Counsel for both the parties and perused the entire material available in file.

(2.) The facts relevant for consideration of this Court are that Petitioner issued a Cheque worth Rs. 8.00 lacs to Respondent No. 2-Harpal Singh. The said cheque bearing No. 640356 drawn from the Corporation Bank, Begum Bridge Road, Meerut, when submitted by Respondent No. 2 on 8.6.2006, had to be encashed after collection through Punjab National Bank, Roorkee,. The said Cheque also bearing the same date '8.6.2006'. The same could not be honoured by Corporation Bank, Meerut and it was returned on the same day, i.e. on 8.6.2006 itself with a memo issued by the said Bank. This memo, along with the dishonoured cheque, was received in the Punjab National Bank sometime after 8.6.2006 and in turn, Punjab National Bank, Ramnagar, Roorkee, annexing its own memo dated 30.8.2006, sent it to Respondent No. 2 informing him regarding the said dishonour. This dishonour had occurred due to instructions of 'stop payment' issued by the Drawer of the Cheque- Anil Kumar Gupta (Petitioner).

(3.) When this memo of Punjab National Bank was received by Respondent No. 2, he sent a notice Under Section 138(b) of the Act on 14.9.2006, but that notice returned 'unserved'. So, after waiting for a month's time, Respondent No. 2 filed a complaint case No. 3002/2006 against the Petitioner for the offence of Section 138 of the Act, whereupon the impugned order of cognizance has been passed. Feeling aggrieved, this petition has been filed.