VINOD MAHASUKHBHAI THAKER Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned APP waives service for the Respondent-State.

(2.) Learned Sr. Advocate, Mr. Kavina, appearing with learned Advocate, Mr. Dave, for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner happens to be the Director of a company, namely M/ s. India Green Reality Limited ('Company, in brief), which had entered into an MOU with Respondent No.2-original complainant on 11/1/2019, whereby, the petitioner had agreed to make payment of Rs.2,45,00,000.00, which was to be made in three installments, during the period from February, 2019 to June, 2019.

(3.) Having heard the learned Sr. Advocate and having perused the material on record, it appears that the learned Sr. Advocate's main plank of argument is that the aforesaid cheques were not issued in respect of discharge of debt in connection with the MOU entered into with the original complainant-Respondent No.2. However, the aforesaid aspect being a matter of evidence, it would not be proper on the part of this Court to observe anything with regard to the same and at this stage, nothing can be presumed in favour of the petitioner, as the same is subject to evidence. Therefore, I do not see any reason to entertain these petitions.