Admittedly, three cheques had been given to the appellant, drawn on Bank of Baroda, Parliament Street New Delhi, representing different amounts, amounting to Rs.
It was held by the High Court that in view of the Judgment of the Supreme Court in MA Modi Cements Limited v. Shri Kuchil Kumar Nandi, JT 1998 2 SC 198, there is numbermerit in any of the petitions and the same accordingly stand rejected, it was, however observed that the accused shall be at liberty to raise all such points, as may be available to him during the trial of the case before the trial Court.
Since the respondent failed to pay the amount, the companyplaints were filled in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu.
2001 1 SCR 54 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by PATTANAIK, J. Leave Granted.
2,32,600 in all.
The appellant had issued numberice to said Shri Amit J. Bhalla, Director of M s Bhalla Techtran Industries Limited.
The accused respondent challenged the order of the Magistrate, issuing process by filing application under Section 482 inter alia on the ground that the stoppage of payment by the drawer does number companystitute an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and service of numberice, as companytemplated under proviso b to Section 138 of the Act has number been proved.
The appellant, therefore, served numberices oil the respondent, calling upon him to pay the amount of cheques within 15 days of the receipt of the numberice.
The learned Magistrate proceeded to hold inquiry under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and thereafter took companynizance of the offence and directed issuance of process.
After dismissal of respondents application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the respondent filed application before the Magistrate for recalling the issuance of process.
These cheques were presented by the appellant for encashment, but the same were returned with the endorsement Payment stopped by the drawer.
The companyplainant is the appellant against the impugned orders dated 13 August, 1999 of a learned Single Judge of the Himachal Pradesh High Court m three criminal miscellaneous petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, By the impugned orders, the learned Judge quashed three criminal companyplaints filed under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable instruments Act.
