PREM SAGAR SONI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant, by means of this application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. , has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with prayer to quash the impugned order dated 18. 06. 2012, passed by A. C. J. M. , Court No. 11, Azamgarh in Complaint Case No. 6381 of 2011, under Section 138 N. I. Act, P. S. Sidhari, District Azamgarh.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, learned A. G. A. for State and perused the record.

(3.) Learned counsel for applicant argued that opposite party no. 2 had taken Rs. 8,00,000/- as earnest money for making a sale of immovable property in favour of applicant on 10.9.2010 and an assurance for execution of sale deed was given within a week. On 18. 09. 2010 a further demand of Rs. 2,00,000/- towards consideration was made and it was denied. Money paid was demanded back. Opposite party no. 2 requested for grant of time for making repayment, but it was not paid back. Ultimately, on 05.10.2010 opposite party no. 2 issued two cheques, one of Rs. 2,00,000/- bearing No. 465182 and another of Rs. 1,00,000/- bearing No. 465183 with assurance for returning remaining Rs. 5,00,000/- in cash. These two cheques were presented before Allahabad Bank, Branch Daulatabad, District Azamgarh, which were dishonoured because of insufficient fund in account. This dishonour was communicated on 30. 03. 2011. A notice was issued to opposite party no. 2, but even after notice dated 21.5.2011, no response was made. Even after receipt of notice, an assurance was made for making repayment of entire amount within a month. Applicant, being an innocent person, waited for a month, but it was of no avail. Again a request was made, wherein assurance was being extended on every day. Ultimately, a complaint was filed on 4.7.2011 for offences punishable under Section 138 N. I. Act and it was rejected by trial court because of being time barred. It was abuse of process of law. Hence, this application with above prayer.