JAI PARKASH SINGH Vs. RAJIV KUMAR GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have approached this Court seeking quashing of complaint case No.8 dated 12.1.2002 and also summoning order dated 14.2.2002 in respect of which the petitioners have been facing trial for offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

(2.) A few facts necessary to notice for disposal of this petition are that respondent-complainant/Rajiv Kumar Gupta instituted a complaint dated 11.01.2002 (Annexure P-1) under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioner and his wife Mrs. Chinta Singh alleging therein that the accused had borrowed a sum of Rs.3.5 Lakhs and had issued a cheque dated 28.9.2001 for an amount of Rs.3.50 Lakhs in discharge of the said liability but upon presentation of the same, the same was dishonoured leading to filing of the complaint by the respondent/complainant.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners while assailing the complaint has submitted that the complaint has been filed on the basis of false allegations and that infact the respondent had laid his hands on a blank cheque signed by the petitioner as security in respect of a loan advanced by partner of respondent to the petitioners and had misused the same by filling up particulars and by presenting the same for encashment. It has further been submitted that although the complaint purports to have been filed through one Subhash Chander, attorney of the complainant, but it had later on transpired that no such person by the said name exists and that in fact Deep Kumar Gupta, father of the complainant, had been appearing in the Court by impersonating as said Subhash Chander. The learned counsel in this context cites a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as A.C. Narayanan vs. State of Maharashtra and another, 2015 1 RCR(Cri) 823 .