DINESH KUMAR CHAUHAN Vs. PRAVESH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it transpires that the challenge herein is to the order of cognizance dated 18.01.2011 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, U.S. Nagar in criminal complaint case no.5024 of 2010, titled as Pravesh Singh Vs. Dinesh Kumar Singh. Learned Magistrate took cognizance and summoned the petitioner to face trial u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act).

(2.) The fact, as narrated in the complaint filed on 29.11.2010, are that the petitioner got some building construction work done through the respondent for which he issued two Cheques dated 7.5.2010 and 10.7.2010 worth Rs.1.00 lakh and Rs.6.50 lakh respectively. When the cheque issued on 10.7.2010 was dishonoured on account of instructions of the Drawer of the Cheque to the effect of 'stop payment', the information was sent by the bank vide memo dated 8.9.2010. Thus, the notice was sent by the respondent on 20.9.2010 as envisaged u/s 138(b) of the Act. The averment made in the complaint itself discloses that after receiving the said notice, the petitioner assured the payment of the said Cheque in case it is presented again for encashment.

(3.) Thus, the same was accordingly presented by the respondent but the Bank returned the same with the same endorsement of 'stop payment' vide memo dated 9.10.2010. Respondent thereafter issued a second notice which was received by the petitioner on 23.10.2010, wherefor he also received a reply dated 3.11.2010 by the petitioner. But even then, when he could not get the payment, he filed the instant complaint on 29.11.2010.