REKHA GOYAL Vs. CINEMASTER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under Sec. 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing of order dtd. 13/8/2024 (Annexure P-17), passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ambala in case titled as M/s Cinemaster vs. M/s Viktoria Cineplex, arising out complaint bearing CIS No. NACT/2322/2019, filed under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short N. I. Act'), whereby the petitioner had been declared a proclaimed person.

(2.) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner on the grounds and it has been argued by her counsel that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the aforementioned complaint. The petitioner was not aware about pendency of the aforementioned complaint. A perusal of the complaint would show that two addresses of the petitioner's firm have been given in the same. Even the address of the petitioner has been wrongly mentioned as of Madhya Pradesh, whereas the correct address of the petitioner is of Bathinda, Punjab. It is further submitted that since the warrants/notices were issued at the wrong addresses, the petitioner was never served with any notice/warrants issued by the learned trial Court. Hence, the petitioner had been declared a proclaimed person without following the proper procedure prescribed under Sec. 82 of Cr.P.C. Even otherwise, the petitioner is ready to join the Court proceedings. Hence, it is urged that the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at considerable length and have also gone through the material placed on record.