AUTO PINS INDIA LTD Vs. U T CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The crux of the facts, which needs a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petition and emanating from the record, is that the complainant M/s Modern Steels Limited-respondent No.2 (for brevity "the complainant") filed a criminal complaint (Annexure P10) against the petitioners M/s Auto Pins (India) Limited and others, for the commission of offences punishable under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter to be referred as "the Act") and Sections 406 & 420 IPC, inter-alia pleading that a sum of Rs. 2 crores is payable and due from the accused to the complainant. The accused, after checking the account and to clear a part of balance of existing liability of the amount payable by them to the complainant, issued a cheque, bearing No.195374 110015108 dated 7.8.2002 drawn on Canara Bank, Faridabad for an amount of Rs. 3 lacs only. The cheque deposited by the complainant in the bank, was dishonoured and received back with the endorsement of the Bank alongwith its Memorandum dated 21.12.2002 with the remarks "Payment Stopped by Drawer" of the cheque. The endorsement of Canara Bank was received by the complainant through Punjab & Sind Bank, Chandigarh, with whom, the cheque was deposited for encashment alongwith their memorandum dated 2.1.2003. Thereafter, the legal notices were issued to the accused on their correct addresses through counsel as well as through registered speed post with acknowledgment due and under postal certificate (UPC), vide postal receipts dated 17.1.2003. The notices sent to S.C.Khandewal (petitioner No.4) and accused R.P.Khurana were received back with the remarks "refused" and other notices sent to the accused under registered speed post and UPC were never received back.

(2.) Levelling a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events, in all, according to the complainant that since the cheque issued by the accused in discharge of their liability was dishonoured and even they did not make the payment despite issuance of legal notices on their correct addresses, so, they have committed the indicated offences in the manner described hereinbefore.

(3.) Taking cognizance of the offences and considering the preliminary, oral as well as documentary evidence, in the shape of resolution (Ex.C-1), cheque (Ex.C-2), memo (Ex.C-3), intimation (Ex.C-4), unclaimed envelopes (Ex.C-20 to Ex.C-25) etc., the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate summoned the accused to face trial under Section 138 of the Act, by virtue of summoning order dated 23.1.2004 (Annexure P12).