RAJINDER GUPTA Vs. M/S.JAGMOHAN MOTORS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of criminal complaint No.RBT-168/10.11.15/11.5.18, titled as 'M/s Jagmohan Motors Ltd. Vs. M/s Apra Auto (India) Private Limited', under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, (for brevity, 'NI Act') read with Section 420 IPC and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, including the order dated 12.01.2016, whereby the petitioner stands summoned to face the trial in the said complaint.

(2.) The brief facts, out of which the present petition has arisen, are that M/s Apra Auto (India) Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the Company') and its Directors, including the petitioner, with the averments that accused No.1- M/s Apra Auto, who deals in Maruti Cars and Spares, had entered into an agreement to sell dated 27.03.2015 through accused No.2-Anumodh Sharma with the complainant-company, for selling the land measuring 15 kanals 16 marlas, situated within the revenue estate of village Rewari, Tehsil and District Rewari, for a sale consideration of Rs.7,75,00,000/-. Accordingly, an amount of Rs.7,50,00,000/- had been handed over to accused, vide two cheques bearing No.204723 dated 27.03.2015, amounting to Rs.5,25,00,000/- and cheque bearing No.204849 dated 27.03.2015, amounting to Rs.2,25,00,000/- towards earnest money/advance sale consideration. The time limit for registration of the sale deed had mutually been agreed as on or before 20.04.2015. Thereafter, the accused had demanded another amount of Rs.40,00,000/- towards balance sale consideration and other miscellaneous expenses and on the pretext that the amount was required for clearing the bank loan for the release of the property from the bank so that the agreement to sell could be fulfilled as per the fixed time schedule. Accordingly, the amount of Rs.40,00,000/- had been handed over to the accused vide cheque No.000071 dated 03.04.2015, drawn on HDFC Bank Limited, Sonepat. In this manner, a total amount of Rs.7,90,00,000/- had been handed over to the accused by the complainant. Since the property agreed to be sold by the accused to the complainant, was mortgaged with the bank, it was agreed by the parties that the accused would give the peaceful vacant possession of the land to the complainant at the time of registration of the sale deed. However prior to the date fixed for the registration of the sale deed, the accused informed the complainant that they (accused) were not in a position to get the land redeemed from the concerned bank and had expressed their inability in execution of the sale deed. Since the accused failed to perform their part of the agreement, it was mutually decided that the accused would return back the amount of Rs.7,90,00,000/- to the complainant. Accordingly, the accused had handed over three cheques for an amount of Rs.7,85,00,000/- to the complainant to discharge their legal liability with the assurance that as and when these cheques are presented for encashment, the same would be get honoured immediately by their banker. The details of the said cheques are as under:- Sr. No. Cheque No. with date Account No.1 of Account No. Name of Bank Amount of the cheque 1. 019303 Dated 15.6.15 051100000000- 0202 The Nainital Bank Ltd. Rs.35,00,000/- 2. 019305 Dated 15.6.15 051100000000- 0202 The Nainital Bank Ltd. Rs.2,25,00,000/ - 3. 019304 Dated 15.6.15 051100000000- 0202 The Nainital Bank Ltd. Rs.5,25,00,000/ -

(3.) The further averments of the complainant are that accused Nos.2 to 5 are the persons in-charge of and responsible to accused No.1-complany in the conduct of its day to day affairs, management and business etc. The accused also assured that they would maintain sufficient balance in their account so that whenever the cheques were presented for encashment, the same would get honoured. Out of the three above-mentioned cheques, two cheques mentioned at Sr. Nos.1 and 2 were initially presented for encashment by the complainant with his banker i.e. Oriental Bank of Commerce, Branch Railway Road, Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar, but the same were dishonoured with the remarks 'Insufficient Credit' and 'Insufficient Funds', respectively. The said fact was brought to the notice of the accused whereupon they had requested the complainant to wait for a few days and further requested to present for encashment all the cheques in the second week of September, 2015. On the assurance of the accused, the complainant again presented all the three cheques for encashment with his banker. However, the cheques mentioned at Sr. Nos.1 and 2 were again dishonoured and returned vide bank memo dated 10.09.2015, with the remarks 'Insufficient Balance' and 'Insufficient Funds', respectively and the cheque mentioned at Sr. No.3 was also dishonoured and returned vide bank memo dated 14.09.2015, for the reason 'Insufficient Funds'. Thereupon, the complainant got a legal notice issued to the accused calling upon them to make the payment, but to no avail.