BABLU KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The present application has been filed by the petitioner invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court for quashing the order dtd. 3/1/2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bhojpur, Ara, in Cr. Revision No.92 of 2022 by which the order taking cognizance under Sec. 138 of the N.I. Act dtd. 19/5/2022 by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ara, in Complaint Case No.429(C) of 2022 was set aside and the revision petition filed by the opposite party no.2 was allowed.

(3.) The facts giving rise to the present complaint application is that petitioner had sold paddy to the opposite party no.2, who is the owner of Durga Rice Mill, Hasan Bazar, Bhojpur and the opposite party no. 2 had given a cheque of Rs.6,00,000.00 to the petitioner on 28/12/2021, but the cheque was dishonoured by the Bank. It is alleged that when the petitioner informed the opposite party no.2 about the same, he did not give a satisfactory reply and then petitioner sent a legal demand notice through his lawyer on 10/3/2022, complying with the mandatory provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 but the opposite party no.2 neither responded to the notice nor made any payment. In such a situation, the petitioner filed a Complaint Case No.429(C) of 2022.