GHJULAM RASOOL MIR Vs. GHULAM MOHD BHAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the outset it may be observed that this petition under Section 561 -A Cr. P. C. has been drafted in a novel style, seeking issuance of writ of Certiorari for quashing criminal proceedings in file no.574, titled Ghulam Mohammd Bhat & others v. Ghulam Rasool Mir and another, pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Magam, together with the order of cognizance drawn by the learned Magistrate and the issuance of process against the petitioners. However, without going into the question of form of the petition and the prayer made therein, the relevant facts unfurled from the records are briefly stated.

(2.) THE petitioners -accused and the respondents -complainants are stated to have been engaged in business of nuts inter se. The respondents filed a complaint under Section 200 Cr. P. C read with Sections 420, 422, 405 and 506 RPC before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Magam, alleging therein that petitioner no.1 had issued seven cheques, details whereof have been given in the complaint, in favour of respondent no.3. The cheques, on being produced before the State Bank of India, Pattan, were returned back to the complainant no.3 with the report 'insufficient funds '. Similarly, petitioner no.2 is alleged to have issued four cheques, detailed in the complaint, in favour of respondent no.3. These cheques. Too, are stated to have been dishonoured by the Bank for reason of insufficient funds. It is further stated in the complaint that petitioner -accused no.2 had also issued seven more cheques to the agents (assamies) of the respondents with the consent of the parties. It is alleged that the above cheques were issued by the petitioners -accused with intention to cheat the respondents - complainants. It is alleged that the petitioners -accused issued the cheques dishonestly to grab the outstanding amount of Rs.13,15,664.00. It is also stated in the complainant that ultimately, on being approached to liquidate the amount, accused no.1 executed an agreement undertaking to pay Rs.50,000.00 on 20th of every month and the first installment was due on 2011, but the same was not paid. Hence the complaint.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the trial court record and considered the matter.