TARUN AGGARWAL Vs. VIVEK SINGHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Oral) Petitioner seeks quashing of complaint titled as 'Vivek Singhal v. Anil Aggarwal and Anr.' bearing No. 502 dated 14.8.2004 pending in the court of Shri P.K. Lal, Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chandigarh. The petitioner also seeks quashing of summoning order dated 21.10.2004 vide which the petitioner has been summoned as an accused under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

(2.) RESPONDENT Vivek Singhal has filed a complaint under section 138 of the Act as amended up to date. The complainant also sought the prosecution of the petitioner under section 420 IPC. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that bare reading of the complaint does not disclose any offence under section 138 of the Act. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the cheques issued by Anil Aggarwal i.e. father of the petitioner were dishonoured on presentation.

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent has opposed the present petition on the plea that in view of the provisions of Section 141 of the Act any person can be prosecuted. The contention of the learned counsel for the respondent was that both the accused had been carrying on the business and therefore, the proceedings against the petitioner cannot be quashed as notice under section 138 of the Act was also issued to him.