High Court Of ChhattisgarhCRMP/1276/2021disposed off

Sulabh Jain v. Satish Agrawal

2021-11-25Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRMP No. 1276 of 2021 • Sulabh Jain, S/o Kapurchand Jain, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Ajad Chowk Near Masjid, Simga District Baloda-BazarBhatapara (C.G.). Office Address- C/o Director Munmun Auto, Near Saropi Talab, Simga, District- Baloda-Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

• Satish Agrawal, S/o Late Bhagatnarayan Agrawal, Aged About 69 Years, R/o K.K. Ward Bhatapara, P.S. Bhatapara City, DistrictBaloda- -Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ---- Respondent For Petitioner : Shri Shashank Thakur, Advocate For Respondent : None.

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 25.11.2021

1. The present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashment of the entire proceedings in complaint case No. 07/2019 (Satish Agrawal Vs. Sulabh Jain) pending before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhatapara, District Baloda-Bazar under Sections 138, 142 and 117(C) of Negotiable Instrumental Act, 1881.

2. Brief facts of the case are that complainant filed a complaint

under Sections 138, 142 and 117(C) of the Negotiable Instrumental Act, 1881 alleging that the complainant and the petitioner have business relationship, therefore, he gave loan to the petitioner on several occasions. As per the averment of the complainant, the petitioner is liable to pay an amount of Rs. 70 lacs to the complainant. It is further contended that the petitioner issued two cheques dated 15.11.2018 and 14.12.2018 for discharging his liability and the same were dishonored on account of transfer of account to another branch. Hence, the petition filed by the complainant.

3. Heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the order-sheet of order dated 06.12.2019 passed by the trial court, whereby the application of complainant has been rejected by the trial court and fixed the case for particulars of offences.

4. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, direction may be given to the petitioner to appear before the trial court and raise his objection/grievance at the time of final arguments.

5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Ruchi