JUDGEMENT
ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN,J. -
(1.)Prayer made herein is for quashing of criminal complaint No.676 of 2016, filed under Sections 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'N.I. Act') and the consequent proceedings including the judgment of conviction dated 14.08.2018 and order of sentence of the even date, passed by the trial Court, vide which the petitioners were held guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and petitioner No. 1 was further directed to pay Rs. 25 Lakh as compensation to the complainant; on the basis of the compromise entered into between the parties. The appeal, preferred by the petitioners, is stated to be pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rupnagar.\ In brief, the facts of the case are that petitioners/accused entered into an agreement to sell with the complainant vide agreement dated 05.07.2012 pertaining to land measuring 4 Kanal 7-1/2 Marla, Village Datarpur, Tehsil Morinda, District Ropar. The accused received Rs. 10 lakh as earnest money for the above said land from the complainant and promised to execute a sale deed in favour of the complainant on or before dated 29.07.2015. As per the terms and conditions of the agreement to sell, the complainant marked his presence on 29.07.2015 and waited for the accused till 5.00 PM for the execution of the sale deed in the office of Sub-Registrar/Tehsildar, Morinda District Rupnagar. Thereafter, the complainant approached the accused but the accused kept on delaying and later on the complainant came to know that the accused had sold out the said land to some other person. Subsequently, the complainant made a complaint before the Police Authorities and further the accused compromised the matter with the intervention of respectables and promised to pay back double the amount as per the terms and conditions stipulated in the agreement to sell.The above said compromise was reduced into writing and as per the compromise and in order to discharge the legal liability the accused issued two cheques i.e. cheque bearing No. 658001 and cheque bearing No. 657998 dated 15.06.2016 amounting to Rs. 10 lakh each. The accused assured the complainant that the above said cheque shall be encashed when the same will be presented before the bank. However, when the complainant presented the above said cheques before bank, the same were dishonoured and returned back with remarks "Funds Insufficient". On the request of the accused, the said cheques were again presented for encashment and the accused also gave assurance that same will be honoured after waiting one month more. Thereafter, the said cheques were again presented by the complainant on 30.08.2016 before his bank, however, the said cheques were received back by the complainant on 31.08.2016 with the remarks "Funds Insufficient". Thereafter, the complainant served a legal notice upon the accused on 30.09.2016, however, petitioners/accused did not respond to the same, hence, the present complaint was filed by the complainant.
(2.)During trial, complainant Gurmukh Singh appeared as CW1 and produced some documents i.e. copy of agreement Ex. C1, application for getting presence marked Ex. C2, copy of compromise Ex. C3, original cheques Ex. C4 and Ex. C5, copy of the bank memos Ex. C6 to Ex. C9, copy of legal notice Ex. C10 and postal receipts Ex. C11-A to Ex. C11-D, original registered cover of legal notice Ex. C12 to Ex. C13. Accused/petitioner No. 2 Baljit Singh absented during the course of trial and was declared P.O. vide order 10.04.2018.
(3.)Thereafter, complainant examined CW2 Gaurav Saini, SWO Grade A, Punjab and Sind Bank, Phase-5, Mohali, who stated that he has brought the original summons record pertaining to cheque No. 658001 dated 15.6.2016, cheque No. 657998 dated 15.6.2016 amounting to Rs. 10 lakh each. Copy of account statement is Ex.C14, copy of cheque returning register Ex. C15.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.