BIJU KUMAR ROY Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. P. P. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent as well as Mr. D. J. Haloi, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2.

(2.) This is an application under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying for setting aside the order dtd. 12/7/2022 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bajali at Pathsala in C. R. (N.I.) Case No.1/2021, whereby, the said Court rejected the prayer for payment of 20% of cheque amount to the complainant/present petitioner under Sec. 143 A of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1883.

(3.) The brief facts of the case is that; the petitioner in the month of January' 2017 shifted to a rented house of Shri Monoranjan Kalita of Baghmora Bazar under Patacharkuchi Police Station, Bajali, where he met the respondent No.2 who used to stay in the same building as a tenant. In the month of January' 2018, the accused/respondent No.2 requested the complainant/petitioner to give loan of Rs.6,00,000.00 (Rupees Six Lakhs) only as he was in urgent need of money. After consulting with his wife, the petitioner decided to help the accused/respondent No.2 and he arranged Rs.1,50,000.00 (Rupees one lakh fifty thousand) only from his own and paid to the respondent No.2. Thereafter, he also requested his brother-in-law, Sri Diganta Barman, resident of village Samoitapara to help the accused/respondent No.2 with Rs.4,50,000.00 (Rupees Four lakhs fifty thousand) only. Accordingly, the petitioner's brother-in-law also arranged a sum of Rs.3,00,000.00 (Rupees Three lakhs) only and Rs.1,50,000.00(Rupees one lakh fifty thousand) only on 3/2/2018 and 8/2/2018 respectively and gave to the respondent No.2 in the residence of the complainant. In both the occasions, while, the accused/respondent No.2 had accepted the aforesaid amounts, the complainant was present along with his wife Smti. Saraju Das.