PRAKASH SINGH KACHHAWAHA Vs. RAMESH SOLANKI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner with a prayer to quash the proceedings qua the petitioner in Criminal Original Case No.352/2001 pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pali.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the respondent- complainant Ramesh Solanki filed a complaint against the petitioner and his son on 5.3.2001 in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Environment), Pali under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act while alleging that the petitioner and his son Naresh Singh used to book rooms in his hotel Happy Home situated at Bus Stand Pali but did not make full payment, however, on asking of the petitioner his son Naresh Singh delivered a cheque on 4.1.2000 of Rs.50,000/- as part payment bearing date of encashment as 1.4.2000. Later on Naresh Singh changed the date of encashment of cheque from 1.4.2000 to 14.7.2000. The cheque was signed by Naresh Singh being the Proprietor of S.L.C. Shiva Consolidated Company. After 14.7.2000 when the petitioner and and his son did not make the payment, then the respondent-complainant approached them and then Naresh Singh assured him that the cheque given by him will be honoured in the month of December 2000. On the assurance given by the Naresh Singh, the complainant presented the cheque in the Bank on 30.12.2000 but the same was dishonoured on account of insufficient fund in the account. On receiving the said information, the respondent gave a notice to the petitioner and his son and asked for payment of Rs.50,000/- within 15 days from the receipt of said notice. The petitioner and his son received that notice on 20.1.2001 but despite that the payment was not made.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the present case it is an admitted fact that the petitioner had never issued any cheque in favour of the complainant and the cheque in question dated 4.1.2000 was issued by Naresh Singh as Proprietor of S.L.C. Shiva Consolidated Company to which the petitioner has nothing to do. It is further stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was falsely implicated by the respondent with intention to build pressure on his son Naresh Singh, who had issued the cheque in question. It is also argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in connection with the complaint filed by the respondent-complainant under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, the trial against son of petitioner, Naresh Singh has resulted in conviction of Naresh Singh, therefore, also the criminal proceedings against the petitioner are liable to be quashed and continuance of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner, particularly in view of the fact that he had not issued the cheque in question, clearly amounts to abuse of process of law.