KRISHAN KUMAR CHANDEL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the relevant documents placed before me.

(2.) Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that that there is civil transaction between the parties. The petitioner has borrowed a sum of Rs. 8,00,000 from the complainant and re-paid a sum of Rs. 9,50,000 inclusive of interest and remaining amount of Rs. 65,950.00 was yet to be paid. When the petitioner borrowed the money, he had given a signed cheque of Rs. 8,00,000 as security. Initially the complainant in statement under Sec. 161 of Crimial P.C. to the police agreed that the papers containing the account of payment and receipt of the money was prepared by him in which Rs. 9,50,000 was shown to be received and Rs. 65,950.00 was yet to be paid by the petitioner. At that stage even the police proposed to file the final report but subsequently at the instance of complainant, investigation was changed and now the police wants to arrest the petitioner.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor has though opposed the bail application, but could not deny the fact that initially the police proposed to give final report in the matter. He also argued that the case for offence u/s.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act is also said to be pending against the petitioner at the instance of complainant.