MUKESH NARANG Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petitions have been filed under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing of complaint bearing No.COMP/28520/2020 under Ss. 384, 193, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 506 IPC filed by respondent No.2 before the Illaqa/Duty Magistrate, Gurugram (Annexure P-7) as well as order dtd. 11/9/2020 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Gurugram (Annexure P-8) with a further prayer for quashing of FIR No.256 dtd. 22/9/2020 under Ss. 193, 384, 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 120-B IPC registered at Police Station New Colony, Gurugram (Annexure P-9). Since both the petitions arise from the same order, they are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners contends that the complainant respondent No.2 had borrowed a sum of Rs.18,46,100.00 in the year 2016 from the petitioner-Narender Yadav's Company namely M/s Royal Chit Fund Private Limited, Gurugram, however, he defaulted in making timely payment of the installments. After repeated requests made by the petitioner-Narender Yadav to respondent No.2 to discharge his legal liability, respondent No.2 ultimately issued cheque No.411480 dtd. 16/3/2020 for an amount of Rs.36,86,060.00 drawn on Karnataka Bank, Gurugram. Similarly, in order to discharge his outstanding liability of Rs.48,12,002.00 towards petitioners-Mukesh Narang and Krishan Lal, respondent No.2 issued cheque No.170332 drawn on State Bank of Patiala, Gurugram. When the aforesaid cheques were presented by the petitioners for encashment in their bank, they were dishonored with the remarks 'funds insufficient', as a result of which complaints under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 were filed by the petitioners against respondent No.2. Subsequently, respondent No.2 with an oblique motive, to avoid his aforesaid legal liabilities, filed a false and fabricated complaint (Annexure P-4) dtd. 24/4/2020 before Police Station New Colony, Gurugram. Respondent No.2 also moved a complaint (Annexure P-4(1)) dtd. 1/6/2020 before the Commissioner of Police, Gurugram.

(3.) Learned senior counsel has contended that respondent No.2 had been coming up with different versions at different stages. Subsequent to the moving of the complaint (Annexure P-4) before the SHO Police Station New Colony, Gurugram, a detailed investigation was carried out by the Police. As per the inquiry report of the SHO (Annexure P-5) the version of respondent No.2 was found to be false and fabricated, however still, the learned Magistrate passed the order dtd. 11/9/2020 (Annexure P-8) by ignoring the said report.