BIJOY AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the Criminal Complaint No. 733 of 2012 filed by the respondent No. 2 before the court of Metropolitan Magistrate No. 17 Jaipur City Jaipur for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

(2.) THE brief and relevant facts giving rise to this criminal misc. petition are that the complainant has filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, interalia alleging that M/s. Gee Pee Info Tech Pvt. Ltd. had allegedly executed an agreement dated 19.1.2012 with the complainant where upon it was vaguely alleged without any specific reference that the accused had provided a Portal, which purportedly was to be activated by the accused, however, it was alleged by the complainant that the said Portal was never activated by the accused as M/s. Gee Pee Info Tech. Pvt. Ltd. was not able to secure a contract with BSNL because of which, it was alleged that M/s. Gee Pee Info Tech Pvt. Ltd. had returned the amount of Rs. 65 lacs by cheque No.943163 dated 15.5.2012 ICICI Bank Ballygunge Branch, Kolkata to the complainant. It is alleged that the complainant himself consumed BSNL epin recharge load. The complainant had presented the said cheque for encashment with Indian Overseas Bank, Tonk Branch, but the said cheque was returned unpaid with the remark "insufficient fund". It is further alleged by. the complainant that he has received Rs. 25 lacs by way of RTGS dated 21.5.2012 out of the total Rs. 65 lacs. For the balance of Rs. 40 lacs, the accused had issued a cheque of Rs.20 lacs dated 15.7.2012 of ICICI Bank, Ballygunge Branch, Kolkata. The said cheque of Rs. 20 lacs when presented at Indian Overseas Bank, Tonk Branch, was also returned unpaid with the remark "insufficient Fund '' on the cheque return Memo dated 24.7.2012. A registered legal notice dated 21.8.2012 was issued by the complainant to the accused inter - alia demanding the cheque amount of Rs.20 lacs within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this notice. The Metropolitan Magistrate vide order dated 6.2.2013 took cognizance of the said complaint under Section 138 and issued summons to all the accused. The petitioner Bijoy Agarwal, who is Director of Gee Pee Info Tech Pvt. has filed the above criminal misc. petition challenging the order of taking cognizance and for quashing and setting aside the criminal complaint No. 733/2012 as mentioned above.

(3.) MR . R.K. Agarwal, Sr. Advocate assisted Ms. Bharti Trivedi, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has argued that the Metropolitan Magistrate has rightly took the cognizance against the accused petitioner. The complainant M/s. Nakshatra Telecom, is having its office at D -228, Tulsi Marg, Banipark, Jaipur, hence the Metropolitan Magistrate has rightly took the cognizance. Mr. Bijoy Agarwal, is the authorised signatory and managing Director of Gee Pee Info Tech Pvt. Ltd. hence the court rightly took cognizance against the authorised signatory and managing director and the company itself, who are accused respondents 1 and in the complaint filed before the Metropolitan Magistrate, which has the territorial jurisdiction. He has placed reliance on Nishant Aggrwal vs. Kailash Kumar Sharma (2013) 10 SCC 72.