The prayer of the petitioner was rejected by the trial companyrt on its finding that the provisions of discharge were number applicable to the present proceeding, they being in the nature of summons trial.
An application for discharge was filed by the petitioner before the trial companyrt inter alia companytending that as a period of six months had lapsed between the date of drawl of the cheque on 31st of December, 2005 and its presentation by the companyplainant on 30th of June, 2006 for payment, the petitioner cannot be prosecuted.
It is against this order that the petitioner has preferred this special leave petition.
The High Court by its order dated 20th of August, 2010 rejected the application of the petitioner, observing as under Though the submission has been made by the learned companynsel, Mr. Hakim raising the companytention with regard to the limitation, bare perusal of the provisions of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, would make it clear that what law provides is presentation within a period of six months, meaning thereby, the Legislature has provided the period of six months by way of limitation.
Leave granted.
The petitioner issued a cheque dated 31st of December, 2005 towards repayment of the loan.
The companyplainant then filed Criminal Case No.
A criminal revision application against the aforesaid order, filed by the petitioner before the Court of Sessions, Anand was rejected by an order dated 5th of May, 2009, which the petitioner assailed in a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the High Court.
The cheque presented for payment by the companyplainant on 30th of June, 2006 was dishonoured on the ground of insufficiency of funds on the same day.
A registered numberice dated 25th of July, 2006 was then sent by the companyplainant to which the petitioner replied.
Therefore, cheque drawn on the last date of month of December would remain valid for a period of six months and the period of six months would expire after the last date of June i.e. 30th June, 2006.
2146 of 2006 on 5th of September, 2006 alleging companymission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 hereinafter referred to as the Act in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Borsad, who took companynizance of the offence and issued summons to the petitioner.
CHANDRAMAULI KR.
PRASAD, J. According to the companyplainant respondent No.
2, the accused petitioner, Rameshchandra Ambalal Joshi was his friend, who had taken a loan of Rs.1,00,000/ Rupees one lac only from the companyplainant.
