CHINTAN JAYANT MANJARATKAR Vs. RASHIDKHAN RASULKHAN PATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present application filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the applicant seeks to quash and set aside the complaint being Criminal Case No.18614 of 2017 pending before the learned 5th Additional Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Vadodara filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter be referred to as "the N.I. Act") and all incidental and consequential proceedings thereof.

(2.) Brief facts of the present case is that the complaint has been lodged by the complainant under Section 138 of the N.I. Act against the applicant alleging that the complainant was desired of purchasing the shop and for that, the applicant's father has told price at Rs.30,00,000/- and, thereafter, the complainant has paid Rs.24,00,000/- by piecemeal payment and when the deal was not finalized, he demanded back the said amount from them and for that, they have agreed to make the payment by notarizing document on 20.09.2016. It is alleged that thereafter, the applicant has demanded Rs.1,00,000/- for necessary process fees for the loan purpose and, thereafter, he has given Rs.1,00,000/- to them and thus, he was to get back Rs.25,00,000/- from the accused, but they did not repay it. It is also alleged that thereafter, the accused have given cheque in the name of the firm which was objected by the complainant insisting that the cheque be given in his personal name, but they have stated that they have no other cheque and, therefore, it has been given in the name of the firm and it was for Rs.10,00,000/- and he has put his signature. It is alleged that the accused's father has also issued cheque of Rs.15,00,000/- of the State Bank of India dated 07.01.2017. It is further alleged that the cheque of Rs.10,00,000/- returned back with an endorsement 'stop payment by the drawer' and, thereafter, after issuance of the notice, he has filed the complaint under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

(3.) Heard Mr.Hasmukh Gurjar, learned advocate for the applicant, Mr.Arpit Patel, learned advocate for respondent No.1 and Ms.Monali Bhatt, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.2 at length. Perused the papers available on record.