NITIN RAJ Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. Sonal Sodhani, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. P.D. Agarwal, learned counsel for the State and Mr. P.A.S. Pati, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

(2.) This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dtd. 12/4/2013 arising out of Complaint Case No.2298 of 2012, pending in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi.

(3.) The complaint case was filed against five named accused persons including the petitioners, who have been placed as accused nos. 4 and 5 alleging therein that on the request and application of the accused persons, the In-charge of Punjab National Bank, Kishoreganj, Ranchi sanctioned Rs.25,00,000.00 under cash credit scheme and term loan and further Rs.40,00,000.00, total Rs.65,00,000.00 was sanctioned to the accused persons Companies and the accused Nos.3 to 5 as a Director of the Company availed cash credit facilities and term loan limit. It was alleged that in the acknowledgment of the said loan facilities, the accused executed various documents at Punjab National Bank, Kishoreganj in favour of the complainant and agreed to give with interest and cost. It was further alleged that the operation of the said cash credit account and term loan was not proper and not in accordance with the terms of the limit sanctioned the accused willfully failed and neglected to submit the monthly stock statement and deposit the daily sale proceeds and monthly stock installment thereof as such both the account became highly irregular. Subsequently, both the accounts have been declared as NPA on 31/3/2011 for Rs.69,69,561.50plus. Later on, one Jigyasu Nath Sahi i.e. Accused no.3 issued a cheque dtd. 20/10/2012 for Rs.10.00 Lakhs to the complainant. It was also alleged that the aforesaid cheque of Bank of India, Kanta Toli Branch was presented in Punjab National Bank, Argora Branch for clearing, but the aforesaid cheque is returned unpaid by the Bank with reason 'insufficient fund' and this fact was intimated to the complaianant by the bank's intimation. It was further alleged that the accused no.3, Director of the company has mischievously and deliberately issued the above mentioned with ulterior motive. It was also alleged that on account of dishonour of the said cheque, the accused persons as Directors of the company, have deliberately committed an offence. It was also alleged that the complainant has sent a legal notice through its Chief Manager dtd. 2/11/2012 registered on 5/11/2012 and asked the accused persons to repay the amount, but the accused in spite of receiving of the said notice neither gave any reply nor made any payment.