JUDGMENT :

S.M. Modak, J.

1. Normally Courts dealing with the dishonour of cheque cases come across a defence of denying the liability, non-compliance of the various time period prescribed in that. In the appeal before this Court, the accused-respondent (apart from taking usual defences) has taken a special defence about issuing the cheque in voluntarily. Accused have pleaded that accused No. 3 (Director of accused No.1-company) was taken to the factory of Milkiyatsingh Saggu on 15/05/2003 and his signature on the cheque in issue was taken by applying force.

2. Complainant-company and the respondent No. 1-company both are involved in similar type of business of dealing in steel and other material. The complainant was a trader, whereas accused No. 1-company is a manufacturer. The issuance of a cheque has arisen out of the transaction of sale of the steel material of different kinds by the complainant to accused No. 1-company. There are two instances of sale dated 13/05/2003 and 14/05/2003. The value of this sale amounts to Rs. 5.00 lakhs. The cheque in question was issued on Punjab