ABHISHEK JAIN Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jai Raj, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State.

(2.) The instant application U/S 482 has been filed seeking quashing the impugned summoning order dtd. 5/12/2014 as well as entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.3473 of 2014 (Prasant Sharma Vs. Abhishek Jain), under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Police Station Hariparvat, District Agra, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial magistrate, Court No.VIII, Agra.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the instant case, the complaint under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as the "N.I. Act") has been filed by the opposite party no.2, whereas he was not the payee of the said cheque, therefore, the complaint is not maintainable. Learned counsel for the applicant relying upon the provisions of Sec. 142 (1) (a) of the N.I. Act submits that such complaint is maintainable only on behalf of the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the opposite party no.2 herein is neither the payee nor the holder in due course of the cheque as has been defined in Sec. 7 and 9 of the N.I. Act, 1881.