AJIT SINGH NAMDHARI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In view of the office note, notice is accepted to have been validly served upon O.P. No. 2, as it has been reported by the process server that the O.P. No. 2 has refused to accept the notice. Heard learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner.

(2.) This application has been filed for quashing of the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 612 of 2004 including the order dated 24.2.2005, whereby and whereunder the Magistrate took cognizance of the offences punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

(3.) The case of the complainant, as has been made out in the complaint, is that an advertisement was issued in the newspaper by the Proprietor and Director of the Baron International Limited, Mumbai with stipulation that whoever would be purchasing Akai T.V. they will be given the post-dated cheque of Rs. 30,000/- which would be payable after six years. Being induced by such statement, the complainant purchased Akai T.V. from the shop of this petitioner who happens to be the dealer of firm Baron International Limited who had issued advertisement in the newspaper. After purchasing T.V., a cheque signed by the proprietor and director of Baron International Limited was given by this petitioner to the complainant. On due date when it was presented before the bank it got dishonored on account of closure of the account. In that event, the complaint case was lodged which was registered as Compliant Case No. 612 of 2004 in which when cognizance of the offences as aforesaid was taken vide order dated 24.2.2005 that has been challenged in this case.