IMRAN KHAN Vs. MOHD IKRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision under Section 397 r/w Section 401 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the accused-applicants being aggrieved by the judgment dated 07.07.2018 passed by the Special Sessions Judge, Bhopal District Bhopal in CRA No. 661/2015 whereby the Court below has remanded the case to the JMFC, Bhopal for taking evidence to prove the return memo Ex. P/3.

(2.) It is not in dispute that Cheque No. 731089 dated 15.06.2012 issued by the applicants was dishonored due to "stop payment" by the applicant. It is also not in dispute that, notice dated 06.08.2012 has been received by the applicants for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

(3.) Respondent's case is that he is the owner of truck and heavy vehicles and leased them on rent. Some trucks are also attached with companies. In February, 2011, applicant No. 1 came to the respondent's house and proposed him that a petrol pump is allotted to him. But due to shortage of funds, he proposed to make respondent to be a partner for investment. Respondent denied to become a partner, hence, applicant No. 1 requested for some money from respondent to purchase petrol and diesel. Thereafter, respondent gave the amount via cheque directly through B&C Company. Respondent in his complaint further claimed that he advanced loan from others and gave Rs. 5,50,000/- through RTGS and thereafter through cheques and lastly on 23.08.2011 an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- as cash and Rs. 3,61,710/- as cash on 15.09.2011 to the applicant. He further claimed that from 15.04.2011 to 15.09.2011, he gave Rs. 18 lakhs to the applicant. Rs. 3 lakhs have been returned by the applicant to the respondent through cheque on 28.12.2011, thereafter he assured to return the balance amount till March 2012. In the month of March, 2012, respondent approached the applicant for return of the balance amount of Rs. 15 lakhs. Applicant assured him and gave cheque No. 731089 dated 15.06.2012 of Rs. 15 lakhs drawn on Bank of India, Awadhpuri Branch bearing his signature and seal of his company. The cheque was dishonored due to "stop payment" instructed by the applicant. Thereafter, respondent served demand notice through his advocate and on receipt of the said notice, applicant replied that he has not taken any loan from the respondent, hence, he has stopped the payment of the questioned cheque.