PAWANKUMAR Vs. ASHISH ENTERPRISES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three criminal applications are directed against the order passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amravati taking cognizance and registering the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and under Section 420 of IPC and consequently the issuance of the summonses. In Criminal application No. 433/91 the order dated 4.1.99, in Criminal Application No. 448/91 the order dated 16.12.89 and in Criminal Appeal No. 569/91 the order dated 7.12.89, are under challenge.

(2.) IN Criminal Application No. 433/91, the respondent No. 1 Ashish Enterprises - A registered partnership firm by its Partner, Bansilal Baijanath Jaju, filed a complaint case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 under. The Banking Public Financial Institutions and Negotiable Instruments Laws (Amendment) Act, 1988 and under Section 420 of IPC. The complaint and the applicant/accused are the residents of Amravati having their business. The applied/accused is running a shop for years together of purchasing and selling various seeds within the jurisdiction of City Kotwali, P.S. Amravati. The complainant i.e. the respondent No. 1 - partner and the applicant/accused are acquainted to each other. The complainant advanced a hand loan of Rs. 25,000/- to the applicant on 6.6.89 and in lieu thereof the applicant executed a receipt in favour of the complainant on the very day. It was agreed that the loan amount would be refunded within a short period. Reposing confidence in the words of the applicant/accused, the hand loan was advanced.

(3.) ON the third occasion, a post dated cheque No. 0170621 dated 24.1089 for Rs. 27,000/- of the Bank of Maharashtra, Branch Amravati was handed over to the complainant but the same cheque could not be encashed and it was dishonoured on 2.11.89 with an endorsement that the "Suit filed against the said A/c" The complainant, therefore, was constrained to send a registered notice dated 9.11.89 which was duly served on the accused on 19.11.89. The complainant demanded the principal amount and interest thereon within 15 days from the receipt of the notice. The accused did not comply the notice but sent a reply by registered post on 17.11.87 making false allegations.