OM PRAKASH Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred with unusual prayers that the proceedings in complaint cases Nos. 627 of 2000, 42 of 2001, 36 of 2001 and some others under S. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') instituted by opposite parties Nos. 2 and 3 in respect of which the petitioner has received summons for appearance in the Court of Judicial Magistrate II, Salem, State of Tamil Nadu be stayed; the concerned Magistrate be prohibited from taking cognizance of the said complaint cases; the said cases may be required to be transferred to the concerned Criminal Court at Varanasi and appropriate investigating agency at Varanasi be directed to register the First Information Report of the petitioner on the basis of his various applications, copies of which have been annexed as Annexures VI, VII, IX and XV to the writ petition.

(2.) The woodcut profile of the case as is disclosed from the various averments made in the writ petition is that the petitioner and the opposite parties Nos. 2 and 3, who originally lived at Varanasi had thick bond of friendship and family ties; they had acquired joint properties and extended helping hand to each other in business and trade. Incidentally, they were also the neighbours. The petitioner has engaged himself in the business of electronic goods and other articles and carries on the business in the name and style of M/s. Dhanwantri Electronic Visheshwarganj, Varanasi. He borrowed a sum of Rs. Six lacs from the opposite parties Nos. 2 and 3 for developing his business of electronic goods, but paid it back. Besides the above specific instance of advancement of loan, according to the petitioner, other money transactions between him and the opposite parties Nos. 2 and 3 had taken place.

(3.) The petitioner went on to state that on account of certain financial constraints and the fact that the opposite parties Nos. 2 and 3 owed a substantial amount to certain other persons and under the pressure of demand of money from them, they (opposite parties Nos. 2 and 3) disappeared in November, 1999 and for some time, their whereabouts were not known. On 26-1-2000, it is stated, the petitioner received a call from the opposite party No. 2 that he should visit Chennai for darshan of holy shrine Tirupathi Balaji. The petitioner was not much eager to go but ultimately, as averred by him, he left for Chennai via Delhi by air on 2-6-2000 and on arrival at Chennai, he was received by the opposite party No. 2 and one Shiv Kumar Aggaral also known as Babuji. After darshan of Tirupathi Balaji, the petitioner came to stay at Salem with opposite parties Nos. 2 and 3. He stayed there during the period 4th June to 9th June, 2000.