PURAN CHAUHAN ALIAS PURAN CHAND Vs. PURAN CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this appeal, the appellants have challenged order, dated 16.01.2017, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class Anni, District Kullu, H.P. in Case No. 63-3 of 2013, whereby learned Court below while disposing of an application so filed before it under Section 256(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, proceeded to dismiss the complaint by holding that as no application by a competent person entitled to continue the lis after the death of original complainant was before the Court, therefore, the Court had to proceed with the assumption that the complainant was absent.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present appeal are that a complaint was filed under Section 138 (1) read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1981 by Shri Puran Chauhan, son of late Sh. Mangal Chand against the present respondent, alleging therein that the complainant was an authorized agent of M/s Harkrishan Lal Baldev Rai Fruit Commission Agents, B-214, New Subzi Mandi Azadpur, Delhi-33 and under the authority as an authorized agent of the said firm, he had supplied materials like Empty Cartons, Trays, Strappings Machines and Strapping Rolls etc. to the apple growers, including the respondent/accused, who in lieu of the same, had issued a cheque bearing No. 668095 amounting to '1,56,135/-, dated 10.12.2012 payable at the Kangra Central Co-operative Bank Branch Office, Anni, District Kullu, H.P. It was further the case of the complainant that the cheque was duly presented by him in the bank concerned on 14.12.2012 for encashment, but the same was returned back to the complainant with the remarks "Insufficient Funds". Thereafter, he issued a statutory legal notice, as required and when even then the accused did not make good the payment, he had no option but to file the complaint under Section 138(1) read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(3.) During the pendency of the complaint, original complainant died. After his death, an application was filed before the learned Court below under Section 256(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for substitution of the deceased complainant with Sh. Lok Raj Sharma, son of Sh. Tara Chand Sharma, resident of Village Rrewari, P.O. Dalash, Tehsil Anni, District Kullu. It was averred in the said application that the original applicant was pursuing the complaint on behalf of original complainant, i.e., M/s. H.B. Delhi New Sabzi Mandi Azaadpur Delhi as authorized attorney/representative of the same. It was further mentioned in the application that as authorized representative had expired and the original complainant being based in Delhi and was not personally in a position to proceed with the proceedings, it had authorized and appointed Sh. Lok Raj Sharma as its duly authorized agent/representative to pursue the matter on its behalf before the Court. Accordingly, a prayer was made to allow Sh. Lok Raj Sharma, son of Sh. Tara Chand Sharma to further pursue the case on behalf of the original complainant or in the alternative to allow the original complainant to pursue the case itself.