SAFIQ AHMED Vs. AHSAN HALIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a criminal revision seeking to quash the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, East, by which she had taken cognizance of the case against the petitioner.

(2.) The complaint was filed by non-petitioner No. 1, in the Court of the District Magistrate, East on 15-4-92, stating therein that he had advanced a cash loan of Rs. 4,230/- to the accused petitioner, who issued two cheques one for Rs. 2,500/- dated 11-10-91 and the other for Rs. 1,730/- on 28-11-91 which was post dated for 1-3-1992. According to the complainant, he presented the cheques for the sum of Rs. 1,730/- on 1-3-1992 but it was not cashed. He received an intimation from the bankers that the cheque had been dishonoured for the reason "Payment stopped by the drawer". Complainant gave a notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), but the accused petitioner did not pay the amount. Therefore, he filed this complaint praying that the accused may be punished for committing offence under Section 138 of the Act. Statement of the complainant was recorded who produced certain documents including the intimation from the bank. Substance of the allegations were read over to the accused petitioner who pleaded not guilty. Against this order, the present criminal revision has been filed. In this, complainant has filed a written reply to the revision petition. Arguments have been heard and the records perused.

(3.) The only point to be decided in this petition is, whether, when a cheque is returned by the bank as unpaid for the reason that "Payment stopped by drawer", whether it amounted to an offence under Section 138 of the Act. Section 138 of the Act was inserted by the Banking Public Financial Institutions and Negotiable Instruments Laws (Amendment) Act, 1988 (66 of 1988) which reads as follows :