ANIL KUMAR Vs. BALWANTSINGH SETHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Sec. 482 of the Cr.P.C has been preferred by the petitioner/accused being aggrieved by the order dtd. 16/5/2023 passed in SC NIA No.129/2019 by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jaora, District Ratlam whereby the application preferred by the complainant/respondent for making amendment in the original complaint filed by him under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act, 1881') has been allowed. The petitioner/accused has also challenged the order dtd. 11/3/2023 passed by the trial Court rejecting an application under Sec. 142 of the Act, 1881 filed by him.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the complainant has filed a complaint before the Trial Court under Sec. 138 of the Act, 1881 against the accused. It is his allegation that for returning part of the amount borrowed by him, the accused had issued four cheques to him for payment of a total sum of Rs.7,00,000.00. The cheques were presented for encashment but were returned unpaid on 11/6/2019 due to insufficiency of funds in the bank account of the accused. Thereafter legal notice was sent to accused on 18/6/2019 despite service of which no payment was made by the accused within the period of 15 days of the amount payable under the cheques hence the complaint has been filed by him.

(3.) On filing of the complaint cognizance of the same was taken by the trial Court on 3/8/2019. Thereafter charge under Sec. 138 of the Act, 1881 was framed against the accused. On 7/12/2019, the accused moved an application under Sec. 142 of the Act, 1881 before the trial Court submitting that the complainant has issued notice to him and has filed complaint with respect to the cheque dtd. 10/5/2018 and 15/5/2018. Instead of producing the aforesaid cheques the complainant has produced cheques dtd. 10/5/2019 and 15/5/2019 hence the complaint deserves to be dismissed on that ground. The complainant contested the application by filing his reply submitting that variation in the dates is merely a typographical error and he has already filed an application for correction of the same. By order dtd. 18/3/2023 the aforesaid application of the accused was rejected by the trial Court on the ground that the complaint cannot be dismissed only on the basis of technicalities.