KAPIL UPADHYAY Vs. MILAN AUTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition filed under Section 482 of Cr. PC for quashment of the proceedings of a private complaint Cr. C. No. 2578/05, which is pending against the present petitioner in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Indore for trial of I he offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as "the NI Act" ).

(2.) SHORT facts of the case as narrated in the complaint filed by the respondent are that present petitioner purchased a vehicle from the respondent/complainant and handed over a cheque of Rs. 36,073/- drawn in Transport Cooperative Bank Ltd. , Branch Transport Nagar, Indore. Respondent/complainant presented that cheque for clearance in Unit Trust of India Bank Ltd. , Branch-Indore, within the specified time. The cheque was dishonoured by the banker of the present petitioner with a note that "payment stopped by drawer'. Then notice was given by the respondent to the present petitioner to make the payment, but he failed to pay the amount within one month from the date of receipt of the notice, so respondent filed the complaint against the present petitioner.

(3.) IT has been contended in the petition that initially a notice under Section 138 of the N. I. Act was given by respondent to the petitioner on 13-4-2005, which was duly replied by him. Thereafter, again second notice was given on 3-6-2005, which was also duly replied by present petitioner on 17-6-2005 by registered post, which was served upon respondent on 20-6-2005. It has also been contended that as no complaint was filed within one month from the date of cause of action arisen to the respondent from the date of first notice, therefore, the complaint, which was filed by the respondent before learned Trial Court was clearly time barred and could not have been entertained by that Court, but the Trial Court failed to take note of this irregularity and registered offence against the present petitioner, therefore, it has been prayed that complaint of the respondent be quashed on the ground that it was time barred.