RASHPINDER SINGH Vs. INDIAN RED CROSS SOCIETY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The extraordinary jurisdiction vested in this Court, entrusted by Sec. 482 of 'the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973' has been invoked by virtue of present petition. The petitioner is praying for quashing of complaint No. NACT 4078 of 2019 dtd. 16/8/2019 pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Amritsar.

(2.) In nut-shell, the facts emerging from the record are that the petitioner is facing a prosecution, for the commission of offence punishable under Sec. 138 of 'the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881', hereinafter being referred to as 'NI Act'. The above-mentioned complaint is an outcome of dishonour of cheques issued by the petitioner/accused, hereinafter being referred to as "the petitioner", in favour of the respondent/complainant, hereinafter being referred to as "the respondent" only. According to petitioner, the respondent had issued a tender for vehicle parking in the 'Guru Nanak Dev Hospital Complex and Ram Lal Eye and ENT Hospital at Amritsar' for the period from 25/7/2018 to 24/7/2019, and that being highest bidder the tender was awarded to the petitioner for a sum of Rs.36,22,000.00 plus GST @ 18% . As per petitioner, the total amount to be paid by the petitioner was Rs.42,73,960.00 and that 25% of the same was deposited by him at the time of auction and the remaining amount was to be paid through nine post-dated cheques issued by the petitioner in favour of respondent, for the month August 2018 to April 2019. It is also the claim of petitioner that with regard to above-mentioned deal an agreement was also executed between the petitioner and the respondent.

(3.) The petitioner has further alleged that the post-dated cheque worth Rs.3,56,163.00 dtd. 25/4/2019 drawn on Punjab and Sind Bank, Fatehgarh Churian Road, Amritsar was not honoured by the banker of the petitioner and in the similar fashion another cheque of same amount dtd. 18/5/2019, too, was dishonoured. It has been alleged by the petitioner that with regard to above-mentioned two cheques the respondent had approached the petitioner and the petitioner had requested the respondent not to initiate any criminal action with regard to dishonour of the cheques and promised to pay the above-mentioned amounts but the respondent opted to file a complaint against the petitioner.