SUNANDA RAIPURIA Vs. JITENDRA SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been preferred under Section 482 of Cr. P.C. being aggrieved by the order dated 13/12/2012 passed in Criminal Revision No. 67/2011 by learned Session Judge Shivpuri whereby prayer of petitioner for discharging to her has been rejected and confirmed the order passed by trial Court in case no. 1639/2009.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that, complainant/ respondent filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act alleging that, for the need of business of petitioner's husband, petitioner had taken the cash amount of Rs. 1,30,000/- from respondent against the loan. The petitioner had given two cheques bearing no. 847391 and 847392 of Allahabad Bank dated 25/09/2009 and 29/09/2009 for repayment of loan amount. When the cheques were deposited for encashment it had been returned back due to insufficient fund. Thereafter respondent/complainant sent a notice on petitioner's address on 9/10/2009 which was to receive on 11/10/2009 but neither the petitioner paid the loan amount nor gave any reply of the notice. When the loan amount was not paid, complainant filed a private complaint along with cheqeus. The petitioner was summoned.

(3.) It is submitted that in the cheque which has been submitted along with complaint the date has been mentioned as 25/9/091 which was dishonored on 29/09/2009. The aforesaid cheques had never been given by petitioner to the complainant. It is further submitted that the said cheques have been dishonored by the Jila Sahkari Kendriya Bank on 29/09/2008. This shows that after expiry of more than one year the complaint has been filed by making fraudulent complaint on the basis of forged cheque. It is further submitted that cheques were dishonored on 29.09.2008, therefore notice bearing cheque must be given to the petitioner within the period of 30 days. The process has been started by the complainant after expiry of more than one year. Therefore the proceeding pending before the learned trial Court in case no. 1639/2009 as well as the order passed by the Revisional Court be quashed.