LAWS(GJH)-2022-2-92

BHARATKUMAR NARENDRA PRAJAPATI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On February 14, 2022
Bharatkumar Narendra Prajapati Appellant
V/S
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Sec. 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for quashing and setting aside the complaint being Criminal Case No.19098/2021 pending before learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Negotiable Instrument Court No.29, Ahmedabad.

(2.) Heard learned advocate, Mr. Pravin Panchal for the petitioners and learned APP Mr. L.B. Dabhi for the respondent - State of Gujarat.

(3.) Learned advocate for the petitioners has mainly submitted that the impugned complaint is nothing but a gross abuse of the process of the Court and the complainant has filed the said complaint with malafide intention. It is submitted that the present petitioners have taken loan from the respondent no.2 - complainant. Learned advocate has referred to the loan sanction letter, copy of which is placed on record at Page No38 of the compilation. Learned advocate, after referring to Clause - 7 of the said document, submitted that the loan amount was required to be disbursed in phase manner as per Clause - 7 of the sanction letter, insptie of that, the respondent no.2 - complainant has released entire amount in favour of the concerned Contractor and debited the said amount from the account of the present petitioners. It is further submitted that the cheque which was given to the respondent no.2 by way of security, has been misused by the complainant and the cheque for an amount of Rs.20,95,767.00 has been deposited by the respondent no.2 - complainant and when the said cheque was dishonoured, the impugned complaint is filed. It is also submitted that when the present petitioners came to know that the respondent no.2 - complainant has released the amount in favour of the concerned Contractor, the petitioners have immediately informed the respondent no.2 - complainant, inspite of that, the cheque in question has been deposited with malafide intention. It is, therefore, urged that the complaint be quashed.