BHAGAT RAM Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BHAGAT Ram, the petitioner, had filed a complaint that the respondent Subhash, has sold poplar trees for Rs. 1,37,880 out of which Rs. 30,500/- were paid. For the balance amount, two cheques of Rs. 25,000/- were given in favour of the petitioner. One cheque was encashed, while the other cheque dated August 4, 1989 was dishonoured on August 21, 1989. No complaint was filed in that regard. The respondent is alleged to have approached the petitioner and demanded some time to deposit the amount in the Bank so that the cheque would be encashed. After waiting for some time, the petitioner presented the cheque for encashment but it was dishonoured on January 15, 1990. After serving the notice on January 30, 1990, the criminal complaint was filed.

(2.) THE learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ropar, summoned the respondent with respect to the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The respondent, Bhagat Ram, filed a revision petition. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ropar, on September 28, 1992, accepted the revision petition and set aside the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate holding that the complaint was not competent.

(3.) THE whole controversy revolved with respect to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The same is being reproduced below for the sake of facility :