SAROJ KUMAR SAHU Vs. KISHORE CHANDRA SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed challenging the order dtd. 17/3/2023 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Berhampur in 1CC Case No.73 of 2022 taking cognizance of the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the N.I. Act against the present petitioner-Saroj Kumar Sahu and M/s. Rajarani Real Estates, represented by its partner Saroj Kumar Sahu as there are prima facie materials to proceed against them.

(2.) The allegations in 1.C.C. Case No.73 of 2022 -the complaint , in brief are that the complainant is the owner of Ac.1.403 dec. in Khata No.154, situated at Haladiapadar Mouza,. M/s. Rajarani Real Estate, Berhampur is a Real Estate partnership firm and its partners are Sri Umashankar Panigrahi, Sri Pradeep Kumar Patra and Sri Saroj Kumar Sahu . M/s. Rajarani Real Estate wanted to purchase the land of the Complainant and accordingly, as per understanding different documents were executed in the name of Sri Pradeep Kumar Patra, Sri Umashankar Panigrahi and a General Power of Attorney was also given in favour of them . As per understanding and arrangement of some amount, out of the total consideration amount was to be given at the time registration of documents in respect of the lands referred and for the rest amount, Rs.82,00,000.00 (Rupees Eighty-two Lakhs only), four numbers of Cheques were issued in favour of the Complainant by Saroj Kumar Sahu for and on behalf of M/s. Rajarani Real Estate and its Partners. As cheque No.248052, dtd. 30/9/2021 for Rs.20,00,000.00 (Rupees Twenty Lakhs only) of Utkal Gramina Bank, Raipur Branch, Taratarini Hills, in the District of Ganjam, issued by Sri Saroj Kumar Sahu, presented at State Bank of India, Bijipur Branch, Berhampur, was returned, showing 'insufficient of funds' with Return Memo Report, dtd. 15/11/2021, the complainant issued demand notice to the accused by Speed Post . He received the notice but did not pay the amount within the statutory period. He sent a reply taking false and fabricated pleas with ulterior motive to avoid payment.

(3.) Mr. Jyotirmaya Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Opp. Party and the Petitioner had executed a Sale Deed for some plots for a consideration amount of Rs.82,00,000.00 As per the demand of the Opp. Party, the Petitioner issued four cheques in favour of the Opp. Party bearing Cheque No.248051 for amount of Rs.15,00,000.00, Cheque No.248052 for Rs.20,00,000.00, Cheque No.248053 for Rs.15,00,000.00 and Cheque No.248056 for Rs.30,00,000.00. While issuing the cheques, it had been agreed that the cheques would be presented in the bank for encashment , after execution of the Registered Sale Deeds only in respect of the property - AC.1.103 dec. in favour of the Petitioner. But on the date and time agreed for registration , the complainant did not turn up at the Office of the Sub Registrar . Thereafter, the Petitioner requested the complainant to come to the Office of the SubRegistrar Office to execute the Sale Deeds, but in vain . On 25/10/2021 the Petitioner met the complainant and the latter assured to come to the Office of Sub-Registrar Office for executing the said Sale Deeds, but did not come . Finding no way out and under the apprehension that the complainant was playing fraud with him and would take away the money but not execute or register the sale deed , on 2/11/2021 the Petitioner requested the Branch Manager, Utkal Gramina Bank by writing a letter to stop the payments of the respective four Cheques. On 23/1/2023 the concerned Bank informed that all Cheques in favour of Sri Saroj Kumar Sahu are marked as 'Stop'.