JAINDRA MANILAL TANNA Vs. AB AZIZ LOKHANDWALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THROUGH these two petitions filed u/s 561 -A Cr.P.C quashment of complaints pending on the files of ld. Judicial Magistrate Ist Class Baramulla is sought.

(2.) THE facts in brief as narrated in the petitions/ complaints are that the respondent had obtained financial assistance from the Central Bank of India and some proceedings about same were pending before Debts Recovery Tribunal, Mumbai. It is further pleaded in the complaint that because of the alleged misconduct of counsel engaged to defend the respondent in the said proceedings an ex -parte judgment was passed against the complainant. It is further pleaded that the engaged counsel did not even file appeal against the ex -parte judgment. It is further averred in the complaint that the petitioner and respondent arrived at memorandum of understanding for one time settlement of the case of the respondent with the Central Bank of India. It was agreed upon that in lieu of one time settlement, the petitioner will be entitled to receive substantial amount details whereof have been given in the memorandum of understanding. It is further averred that respondent, accordingly, issued cheques of different amounts in the name of Chandini Agencies of which petitioner is owner. It was also agreed in the memorandum of understanding that in case one time settlement will not sail through then the amount received by petitioner will be returned to the respondent. It is further averred that as the petitioner failed to perform his part of duty, he in terms of the memorandum of understanding by way of liquidation of debt/liability issued eight cheques in the amount of Rs.5 lacs each in favour of the respondent. Two cheques bearing No. 158570 and 158572 amounting to Rs.5/ - lacs each are subject matter of two complaints which are sought to be quashed. Both the cheques were presented for encashment and collection of amount in J&K Bank Ltd branch K.B. Adda Baramulla. The J&K Bank branch office K.B Adda Baramulla, however, returned the cheques with the memo having endorsement "exceeds arrangement". The notice in both the cases were issued and thereafter complaints filed at Baramulla. The record reveals that the ld. Judicial Magistrate /Sub Judge Baramulla after considering the complaint(s), preliminary statement of complainant as also after perusal of the documents was prima facie satisfied about the commission of offence u/s 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act of 1881 (for short 'Act of 1881), process was accordingly issued against the petitioner for his appearance before ld. Judicial Magistrate in both the cases. Both complaints were filed through attorney. The petitioner seeks quashment of complaints.

(3.) HEARD ld. counsel for parties. Considered the matter.