JUDGMENT :

(Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.) :

1. The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of the proceeding in C.R. Case No. 990 of 2018 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 4th Court, Purba Bardhaman.

2. The petitioner's case is that the opposite party herein lodged a written complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Burdwan alleging, inter alia, the following facts :

i) That the opposite party is a businessman. He has a business of garments, travel and electrical goods under the name and style of 'Pragati'.

ii) That the accused person is a LIC Agent and few years ago, he came to the house of the complainant for making a LIC policy and the complainant deposited the money with LIC.

iii) The accused person wanted to take a personal loan in the year 2018 for his business.

iv) The complainant gave Rs.27 lakhs in cash to the complainant.

v) In order to repay the said amount the accused issued one cheque bearing No. 847014 dated 10.10.2018, for Rs.27,00,000/-(Rupees twenty seven lakhs) drawn on South Indian Bank, Burdwan Branch, and the complainant deposited the said cheque in his account on October 11, 2018 in Punjab National Bank, G. T. Road, Burdwan Branch, for encashment. But on October 12, 2018, the said cheque was dishonored due to “Drawer's signature differ”. Thereafter the complainant sent a legal notice on October 22, 2018, as per provisions of Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act requesting the accused to repay the said amount within fifteen days after receiving of the notice.

vi) That the said acknowledgment card was returned in time. Thereafter, the complainant filed the instant case against the petitioner.

3. The petition of complaint was filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act') before the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Burdwan. The said case was transferred to the learned Judicial Magistrate, 4th Court, Burdwan.

4. The petitioner filed a petition before the trial court stating, inter alia, that the impugned cheque has been dishonored due to “Drawer's signature differ” and as such the instant case was not maintainable.

5. The aforesaid application filed by the petitioner herein was taken up for hearing on September 26, 2019 and after hearing the learned advocates of the parties, the learned Judicial Magistrate, 4th Court, Purba Bardhaman was pleased to reject the said application filed by the petitioner on the ground that Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act will attract when the cheque has bounced due to “drawer's signature differs”.

6. The petitioner states that the learned trial court failed to consider that the complainant did not produce any document regarding the payment of Rupees Twenty Seven Lakhs to the petitioner.

7. The petitioner states that on 6th October, 2018, i.e., prior to the issuance of the legal notice by the learned advocate of the opposite party herein, the petitioner lodged a complaint before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Burdwan against the opposite party and one Mou Roy Chowdhury. On the basis of the said written complaint Burdwan Police Station Case No.696 of 2018 was started against the opposite party and another, under Sections 341/308/384/406/420 of the IPC.

8. Mr. Uday Sankar Chattopadhyay, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from a plain reading of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, it is crystal clear that unless the conditions precedent mentioned therein are satisfied, the said penal, provision cannot be attracted.

9. The petitioner has relied upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, reported in (2002) 7 SCC 541 (Vinod Tanna and Another vs. Zaher Siddiqui and others) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court quashed the proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on the ground that the cheque was dishonoured because the drawer's