On 4.2.2002, the learned Magistrate took companynizance and summoned the accused.
I have perused the record and companysidered the submission.
The appellant therefore prayed for summoning and punishing the second respondent and its Directors respondents 3 and 4 .
He recorded the following reasons in that behalf Complaint has been filed by a public servant in discharge of his public duties.
Hence his examination is dispensed with.
I have also perused the original documents also.
The appellant lodged a companyplaint in the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi, alleging that the second respondent companypany had issued a cheque drawn in favour of the appellant, towards discharge of its liability, and the said cheque was dishonoured when presented for payment.
V. Raveendran J. Leave granted.
P.C. Consequently, by order dated 12.1.2007, the High Court allowed the petition and quashed the summoning order.
Heard the companynsel for the parties.
He did number examine the companyplainant and its witnesses, under section 200 of the Code.
Its object is to extend financial and other assistance to small scale industries.
