MAHABIR PARASD JINDAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRAYER made in the petition is for quashing of complaint dated 29. 9. 1993 filed against the petitioners under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments act. Complaint was filed against the petitioners as four cheques allegedly issued by the petitioner No. 1 were returned by the bank with the remarks 'insufficient amount'. A legal notice was allegedly got issued to petitioner No. 1 by the complainant, intimating that as the cheques have been dishonoured they are called upon to make payment of rs. 1,00,000/- along with Rs. 710/- as expenses. Complaint is being sought to be quashed on the ground that it is mala fide one and cheques which nd mention in the complaint were got issued from petitioner No. 1 while he was in police custody. According to the petitioners, petitioner No. 1 had been taken into police custody by police of Sector 36 police Station, Chandigarh and these cheques were got issued in the name of the complainant at that place.

(2.) NOTICE of the petition was given to the complainant who has filed reply. Counsel for the complainant has pointed out that it was never the case of petitioners in reply to legal notice that the cheques had been taken from petitioner No. 1 when he was in police custody, rather the case of petitioner No. 1 had been that "the blank signed cheques nos. mentioned in your notice were missing from the cheque book of my client. It seems that your client has stolen these cheques or got stolen from somebody else because question of issuing cheques to your client does not arise as there had been no business dealing since long. Further your notice also did not specify for in lieu of which these cheques were issued nor the date of issue is mentioned. My client is taking appropriate action for stealing the cheques. "

(3.) IN view of the submission made in the reply to the legal notice, I am of the view that no case is made out for quashing of complaint. According, this petition shall stand dismissed. Petition dismissed.