SUBRATA KUMAR DASH Vs. PRADEEP KUMAR SEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three revisions were taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of by this common judgment, in view of the fact that the petitioner in all the three cases is the same person and points of law involved are also the same.

(2.) Criminal Revision No. 28 of 1996 has been filed challenging the order dated 5-1-96 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bairangpur in ICC No. 75 of 1994 (T.C. No. 481/94) rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for dropping the proceeding on the ground that the mandatory requirements of Section 136 of the Negotiable Instruments Act have not been complied with. On similar grounds applications were also filed in ICC No. 74 of 1994 pending in the same Court which has given rise to Criminal Revision No. 29 of 1996 and in ICC No. 77 of 1994 of the same Court giving rise to Criminal Revision No. 30 of 1996. The impugned orders in all the threecases have been passed on the same date.

(3.) In Criminal Revision No. 28 of 1996, the case of the complainant is that the petitioner had approached him for a loan of Rupees 20,000/- on 30-3-94, but the opposite party had advanced a sum of Rs. 25,350/- on 30-3-94. The money was returned by the petitioner to the opposite party-complainant by way of a cheque drawn on Bank of India, Bairangpur Branch, and the said cheque was presented in the Bank on 14-6-94 but it was dishonoured due to insufficiency of fund. Thereafter a demand notice was sent to the petitioner through registered post, but the same returned without being served. Thereafter the complaint has been filed.