MANJU SINGH Vs. BRANCH MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. against the order dated 5/12/2013 passed by IInd Additional Judge to the Court of First Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa in Criminal Revision No.252/2013, whereby learned Sessions Judge affirmed the order of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sirmour, Distt. Rewa dated 8/12/2009 passed in Criminal Case No.629/2009 whereby learned JMFC took cognizance against the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (further referred as "Act") on the complaint filed by non- applicant/complainant Branch Manager, Union Bank of India Branch Sirmour, Distt. Rewa.

(2.) Brief facts of the case which are relevant to the disposal of this petition are that non-applicant/complainant filed a complaint against the applicant before JMFC, Sirmour averring that on 1/11/2001 the applicant took a loan of Rs. 3 lac from Union Bank of India Branch Sirmour, Distt. Rewa for purchasing a marshal jeep but the applicant did not repay that loan amount. So, the non-applicant/complainant started recovery proceedings against the applicant. The applicant approached the complainant to settle the loan account and had issued a cheque bearing no.54221 dated 10/8/2009 for the sum of Rs.2,96,783/- drawn on Union Bank of India Branch Sirmour for the discharge of its liability. However, when the said cheque was presented for encashment, it was dishonored due to insufficient fund in the account of the applicant. On that, the non-applicant/complainant sent a notice to the applicant through his Advocate but the applicant did not repay the said amount within the stipulated period even after receiving the notice. So, action be taken against her. On that, learned trial Court took cognizance against the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act vide order dated 8/12/2009 and registered Criminal Case No. 629/2009 and issued bailable warrant of arrest against the applicant to secure his presence. Being aggrieved from that order, the applicant filed Criminal Revision no.252/2013 which was dismissed by the learned Second Additional Judge to the First Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa. Being aggrieved from that order, the applicant filed this petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant took a loan of Rs.3 lac from the non-applicant/Bank on 1/11/2001 for purchasing of marshal jeep. The said amount was to be repaid by the applicant to the non- applicant by way of monthly installments of Rs.10,000/- each. Towards security of repayment of the said loan, the applicant also mortgaged a fixed deposit receipt having a maturity value of Rs.2,01,296/- as on 12/5/2006. The said fixed deposit of the applicant was maintained at the non-applicant/ Bank itself. He further submitted that at the time of disbursement of the loan amount on 1/11/2001 the non-applicant compelled the applicant to furnish few signed blank cheques by way of additional security/guarantee. On that, the applicant gave some blank cheques to the non-applicant only as security/guarantee and not towards the discharge of any debt due on her. Since the cheque was issued by the applicant by way of security, the applicant wrote the word "guarantee" on the overleaf of the cheque. It is further submitted that no date was entered in the said cheque at the relevant time and the applicant signed it in Hindi as the applicant is not able to write or sign in English properly. The said cheque was issued by the applicant on 1/11/2001 and was in old format i.e. the said cheque was not in MICR format which is prevalent since January 2009. The applicant duly repaid her monthly instalments of Rs.10000/- towards refund of the loan amount from 1/12/2001 up to 30/8/2002. In this way, the applicant refunded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- by way of instalments towards the repayment of the loan amount to the respondent up to 30/8/2002. It is also evident from the loan account passbook of the applicant. He further submitted that subsequently on account of certain financial hardships, the applicant could not pay the monthly instalments to the non-applicant and therefore, she requested the non-applicant to adjust the repayment of the remaining loan amount from the mortgaged fixed deposit amounting to Rs.2,01,296/ which was already with the non-applicant. And in this manner, the entire loan amount of Rs.3 lac was repaid by her to the non-applicant. He further submitted that suddenly on 15/7/2009 the non-applicant contacted the applicant and informed her that she had certain dues pending towards her loan account which the applicant is required to pay. The applicant categorically informed the non- applicant that she is not required to repay any dues or debt to the non- applicant and the cheques which were given by her as security in the year 2001 should not be misused to falsely implicate her. Even then, the non- applicant wrongly filled up the said cheque for Rs. 2,96,783/- in his own handwriting in English and presented it in its own branch and deliberately got it dishonoured just in order to falsely implicate the applicant. It also appears from the record that the applicant did not produce the original cheque before the trial Court along with the complaint. Learned trial Court on the basis of the photocopy of the said cheque produced by the complainant in support of his complaint took cognizance against the applicant which can not be said to be correct. So, proceedings of the Criminal Case no.629/2009 pending before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sirmour, Distt. Rewa be quashed.