KARTIK KIRTIBHAI PAREKH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) petitioners of both these Revision Applications, preferred under Section 397 r/w. Section 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, are the orig. accused nos.3 and 4 of Criminal Case Nos.2987/2001 and 2988/2001, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate (F.C.), Ahmedabad Rural, filed by the respondent no.2-orig. complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 r/w. Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ( hereinafter referred to as the 'NI Act').

(2.) Considering the points involved in both these Revision Applications, on consensus this Revision Applications have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(3.) The case of the respondent no.2-orig.complainant, Pinnacle Finstock Pvt. Ltd., a broker engaged in sale and purchase of shares on the basis of brokerage, is that their company had transactions of sale and purchase of shares with the orig.accused no.1-Classic Credit Ltd. and that there was outstanding amount payable by the orig. accused no.1 and to honour their liability of payment, the orig.accused no.1 had issued two cheques i.e. (i) Cheque No.944264 dated 5th March, 2001 for an amount of Rs.1,00,66,035-95 ps. and (ii) Cheque No. 944263 dated 5th March, 2001 for the amount of Rs.83,92879/-; and both these cheques were drawn on Global Trust Bank Ltd., Fort, Mumbai. These cheques were handed over to the representative of the respondent no.2-orig. complainant by the accused and the representative of the orig.complainant -Company was assured that as and when the said cheques are deposited, they would be honoured and on the basis of that assurance, the said cheques were accepted. On 14th August, 2001, both these cheques were presented by the respondent no.2-orig.complainant in their bank account with H.D.F.C.Bank Ltd., Satellite Road, Vejalpur Naka, Ahmedabad Branch but they were returned on 18th August, 2001 with an endorsement "Refer to Drawer". The respondent no.2-orig.complainant was informed by the H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd. about the return of the cheques by a Memo dated 24th August, 2001. According to the respondent no.2, thus the accused had committed breach of promise and assurance given at the time of handing over/presentation of cheques. It is averred in the complaint that when the accused were contacted, they replied that the amount of cheques will not be paid and thus the respondent no.2 felt that the accused had cheated him and the accused had committed a breach of trust in pursuance of their common intention.