G L AGGARWAL Vs. NAVNEET INTERNATIONAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner seeks quashing of the complaint, Annexure P-1 and the summoning order dated 25.2.2000, Annexure P-2 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Rewari, whereby the petitioner-accused was directed to face trial under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act').

(2.) The facts as founded in the complaint lodged by the complainant, M/s Navneet International, Chhopatwara, Rewari, through Vivek Kumar, Proprietor against M/s Aggarwal Polytex, Partapur, Industrial Area, Meerut through G.L. Aggarwal, Proprietor and G.L. Aggarwal, accused Nos. 1 and 2 respectively in the complaint have to be focused in brief. Accused No. 2 on behalf of accused No. 1 had purchased sole 'Yarn' from the complainant on credit to the tune of Rs. 79,701/-. In order to discharge the liability towards the said amount, a cheque bearing No. 135349 dated 18.9.1999 was issued by the petitioner-accused which was to be drawn at Corporation Bank, S.S.I., Branch 328/29, Sector 18 Noida as accused had Account No. SB-390 with the said bank. The complainant handed over the said cheque to his banker, Canara Bank, Kaisons House, Chandni Chowk, Delhi. The cheque was sent twice to the Canara Bank for encashment on the request of accused No. 1 and 2 but on both the occasions, the cheque in question was dishonoured on account of insufficiency of funds. On 26.11.1999, the complainant was informed by the Canara Bank, Delhi that cheque in question which was sent for clearance has been dishonoured on account of insufficiency of funds in the account of the petitioner-accused. Thereafter, complainant served a notice dated 8.12.1999 by registered post which was received back with the remarks of the post man that the addressee is not available despite several visits time and again (Praptkarta bar-bar jane par wa suchna dene par nahin milte hain Atha Wapis). Thereafter another notice dated 31.12.1999 was sent by the complainant to the accused by registered post which again was received by him on 8.1.2000 with the remarks, "Lene Se Inkar". As the accused had failed to make the payment within the statutory period of 15 days of demand made by the complainant, the complaint was filed.

(3.) in support of the allegations made in the complaint, complainant appeared as PW-1. He placed on record the memo Ex. PW1/A which indicates that cheque in question was dishonoured due to insufficiency of funds in the account of petitioner-accused. The legal notice dated 8.12.1999, postal receipts Ex. PW1/B and Ex. PW1/C, endorsement Ex. PW1/J to PW1/L and PW1/M to PW1/O were also proved by him. In additional, Naresh Kumar Aggarwal, Clerk, appeared as PW-2 who proved the dishonour of cheque Ex. PW/11, endorsement Ex. PW1/M and Ex. PW1/N. He also placed on record copy of the account Ex. PW2/A. Hawa Singh, PW-3 stated that the registered cover No. 9268 dated 31.12.1999 was sent through post office which was received back undelivered on 8.1.2000 vide Ex. PW1/H. He also proved other documents Ex. PW1/B to Ex. PW1/E.