A R M NIZMATHUALLAH Vs. VADUGANATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner seeks to quash the proceedings pending against him in C. C. No. 28 of 2004 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No. I, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli district filed by the respondent herein against the petitioner for the offence under S. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that to attract S. 138 of the negotiable Instruments Act, the cheque in question must have been Issued for the legally enforceable debt or other liability. The case of the complainant Itself is that the amount was borrowed by the accused in the year 1997 and the date of the cheque is 20-11-2003 and as such, the cheque in this case is not issued for the legally enforceable debt. The debt was time-barred. Therefore, the entire prosecution under S. 138 of the negotiable Instruments Act is not maintainable.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the respondent submitted that though the debt was barred by limitation, by issuing a cheque dated 20-11-2003, the accused-petitioner had entered into an agreement and thereby promising to pay the debt barred by limitation of law. Such an agreement is a valid contract as per S. 25 of the Indian Contract act, 1872. (Hereinafter referred to as "the act" ).