LAWS(HPH)-2025-7-19

SHIRGUL FILLING STATION Vs. KAMAL SHARMA

Decided On July 08, 2025
Shirgul Filling Station Appellant
V/S
KAMAL SHARMA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against the judgment dtd. 7/5/2010 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Rajgarh, District Sirmaur (learned Trial Court), vide which the complaint filed by the appellant (complainant before the learned Trial Court) for the commission of an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (for short "N.I. Act") was dismissed. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the complainant filed a complaint before the learned Trial Court for the commission of an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the NI Act. It was asserted that the complainant and the accused were known to each other. The complainant is a Manager of Shirgul Filling Station at Sanora in Tehsil Rajgarh. The accused is a registered Government Contractor with HPPWD. He owns various vehicles. The complainant supplied the fuel to the vehicles of the accused with an assurance from the accused to make the payment subsequently. The accused was liable to pay Rs.5,00,000.00 till 31/3/2008. He issued a cheque of Rs.5,00,000.00 drawn on UCo Bank Branch Rajgarh to discharge his liability. The complainant presented the cheque before his Bank, but it was dishonoured with an endorsement 'insufficient funds'. The complainant sent a legal notice to the accused asking him to pay the amount within 15 days of the receipt of the notice. The accused refused to receive the notice, and it was returned with the endorsement 'refused'. The notice is deemed to be served upon the accused; hence, the complaint was filed before the learned Trial Court for taking action as per the law.

(3.) The learned Trial Court found sufficient reasons to summon the accused. When the accused appeared, a notice of accusation was put to him for the commission of an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of N.I. Act, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.