SUBODH KUMAR PANDEY Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayer in this petition has been made for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dtd. 27/3/2019 in connection with Complaint Case No.202 of 2019 pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bokaro.

(2.) The complaint case has been filed alleging therein that the allegation against the petitioners is that they fraudulently obtained Rs.11,00,000.00 (Eleven Lacs) from complainant as friendly loan on different dates between 7/10/2017 to 3/9/2018. It is further alleged that petitioner no.1 had assured the complainant that in case his son fails to return money than he would return it. It is further alleged against the petitioner no.2 in the presence of petitioner no.1 had given two cheques i.e. cheque no.064802 dtd. 11/1/2019 of Rs.8,00,000.00(Eight lacs) dtd. 26/3/2019 and cheque no.064803 dtd. 26/3/2019 of Rs.3,00,000.00 (Three lacs) drawn on Federal Bank, Dhanbad and stated that if he fails to return his money up to December, 2018, then he could present these cheques for encashment. Under the oral instruction of petitioners when complainant presented these cheques for encashment they were dishonoured with the remark 'payment stopped by the drawer".

(3.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case and according to him, there was no nexus of any transactional relationship between the petitioners and the complainant and no evidence is there to support that the petitioners have ever taken a single rupee from the complainant. He further pointed out that the petitioner no.1 is father of the petitioner no.2 and the cheque in question was issued by the petitioner no.2. In view of that, maliciously the petitioner no.1 has been implicated in the case. He submitted that if the cheque was dishonoured, only the case is required to be proceeded under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act whereas the learned court has been pleased to take cognizance under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as well as under Sec. 420 of the Indian Penal Code. He submitted that the prosecution against the IPC Sec. are not warranted as there is no intention of cheating from the very beginning. He submitted that admittedly the cheque was issued and it was dishonoured and pursuant to that complaint case was filed and the learned court was not required to take cognizance under Sec. 420 of the I.P.C and petitioner no.1 has been falsely implicated in this case. On these grounds, he submitted that the entire criminal proceeding may kindly be quashed.