GHANSHYAM G KHANCHANDANI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two fold submissions are made by the petitioner, party in person. One that the cheque is forged one and second that the agreement in respect of which the cheque was given is terminated. Whether it was terminated by efflux of time or by act of party, whatever be the position, then the negotiable instrument is given in a form of cheque and it returned, prima facie when the learned Magistrate feels that there is case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the disputed question cannot be gone into.

(2.) So far as the question of cheque is concerned, if it was given blank with the signature of the petitioner it may have its own legality particularly section 20 of the Negotiable Instrument Act and hence at this stage when the trial Court is yet to proceed further with the case before it and record evidence and decide the rival contentions on the basis of the material produced, obviously this court will not interfere with the order whereby request to recall the process was turned down.

(3.) The trial Court shall therefore consider all the contentions raised by the petitioner-accused as well as the complainant before it and on the basis of the oral and documentary evidence that might be produced it shall proceed to decide the case in accordance with law. This will apply to the termination of the agreement also and the petitioner may therefore lead evidence if he is so advised. So far as this petition is concerned, it is rejected.