RAMKUMAR KAUSHWAHA Vs. POORAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashment of the order dated 21/02/2018 passed by IV Additional District Judge, Gwalior in Criminal Revision No.50/17 as well as order dated 20/03/2017 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Morena in Criminal Case No.524/2016 and all subsequent proceedings thereto.

(2.) Precisely stated facts of the case are that respondent/ complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred as "NI Act") on account that loan taken by the respondent on 12/05/2005 has not been returned and towards repayment, cheque dated 28/01/2014 of amount of Rs.1,00,000/- has been issued but the cheque got dishonoured therefore, complaint has been filed before the trial Court under Section 138 of NI Act. Petitioner/ accused filed a complaint under Sections 18 and 19 of the Limitation Act, 1963 on the ground that transaction took place on 12/5/2005 and the cheque is of dated 28/1/2014 as per the pleadings of the complaint itself. Therefore, as per Section 18 and 19 of the Limitation Act if in due custody then the case should be filed within three years and if the case is filed after three years then no amount can be recovered from the accused, therefore, complaint is bared by time. He relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Arvind Kumar Vs. Punjab National Bank, 2013 (III) 38.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposed the prayer and submits that in Sections 18 and 19 of the Limitation Act, fact of acknowledgment of writing has been discussed and petitioner has acknowledged the debt and given the cheque in 2014 therefore, period of limitation shall be computed. He relied upon Section 118 of NI Act as well as judgment of the Apex Court in the case of A.V. Murthy Vs. B.S. Nagabasavanna, 2002 (2) SCC 642.