VINODBHAI Vs. STATE OF H.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER challenges the legality of the summoning order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Nalagarh dated 24.4.2008. The order reads as follows:

(2.) THE petitioner invokes the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C. for short hereinafter) for quashing the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as 'N.I.Act' ) praying that it is an abuse of the process of the Court as the cheque subject matter of the complaint was given a security which was later on manipulated by respondent No.2. Sh. K.D.Sood, learned senior counsel submits that prima facie from the documents on record it is clear and evident that the cheque in question was handed over to respondent No.2 in the year 2006 as security which fact stands accepted by this respondent and later on this cheque was manipulated in the year 2008 and criminal proceedings are being used to harass the petitioner.

(3.) IN Jitendra Raghuvanshi and others Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi and another, JT 2013 (4) S.C. 98, the Supreme Court holds: