MUKESH KUMAR Vs. BIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common judgment, I shall dispose of two connected cases i.e. CRR No. 849 and 2017 of 2016, arising out the same judgments passed by both the courts below.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that according to the complainant, who happens to be Income Tax and Sales Tax Practitioner, he advanced a loan of Rs. 15,00,000/- to the accused-petitioner on 02.07.2010. In discharge of said liability, the accused-petitioner issued a cheque bearing No.034212, dated 04.03.2012, dated 04.03.2012 for Rs. 15,00,000/- drawn Axis Bank Branch, Palwal. The said cheque on presentation was dishonoured due to insufficient funds. After issuing the requisite notice, a complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, was filed.

(3.) After recording preliminary evidence, the accused-petitioner was summoned. The petitioner in addition to his own statement, examined Saurab Gupta as CW1, Akash Sharma as CW2, Vineet Kumar as CW3 and placed some documents. To defend himself, the accused-petitioner examined himself as DW1 and also examined Parveen Kumar as DW2.