ASHOK KUMAR AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Swapnil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the complainant is carrying whole sale business of supply of Plastic Granules and the accused had the business of manufacturing of Plastic Pipes and sheets. They purchased Plastic Granules for Rs. 4,1 0,475 and gave a cheque No. NCCH 2119882 dated 29.7.1997 for this amount on behalf of the firm. The accused had given the assurance that the Cheque would be encased whenever it was presented but it was returned with bank memo dated 31.7.1997 with the endorsement "funds insufficient". Thereafter the complainant met the accused and informed about the dishonor of the cheque. The accused asked him to represent the cheque and also assured that it would be encased after the second week of October 1997. The Complainant again deposited the Cheque in October 1997 but the same was returned on 23.10.1997 with the remark "not arranged for". The cheque was presented third time and it was again returned on 17.11.1997. Thereafter the complainant gave a legal notice dated 22.11.1997 to the accused asking him to make the payment within 15 days from the receipt of the notice. Notice was sent under registered post as well as under certificate of posting but the accused neither gave any reply nor paid the amount inspire of due service. Thereafter the complaint was filed on 8.12.1997. Learned Magistrate vide order dated 20.3.1998 directed to summon the accused persons.

(3.) Learned counsel for the accused applicants has contended that the complaint is barred by time as the cheque was dishonored on 31.7.1997 for the first time and the complainant had informed the accused about the dishonor orally. But this contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is not tenable and cannot be accepted.