RAJNISH BHATNAGAR
Maa Tarini Industries Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
PEC Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of. CRL.M.C. 254/2020 & CRL. M.A. 1107/20201. The petitioners have filed the present petition u/s 482 of the Cr.P.C. with the following prayer:
(a) Call for the record of CC No. 16819 of 2017.
(b) Quash the Complaint No. 16819 of 2017 for the reasons set out in the present petition.
(c) Set aside the impugned order dated 25.10.2019 passed by the Ld. ASJ, Patiala House in Criminal Revision Case 230/2019.
(d) Set aside the order dated 19.12.2017 passed by Ld. MM-4/PHC Patiala House in CC No. 16819 of 2017.
2. The respondent herein had instituted a complaint under section 138 read with section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 against the petitioners herein in respect of non-payment against the eleven dishonoured cheques for the total amount of Rs. 19,00,00,000/- (Rupees Nineteen crores only) issued on behalf of and by petitioner company in favour of the respondent company.
3. The Metropolitan Magistrate vide his order dated 19.12.2017 held as follows :
"From perusal of complaint and documents attached, prima facie offence U/s 138 r/w Section 141 of NI Act, 1881 is made out. Accordin
Suman Sethi vs. Ajay K. Churiwal and Anr. (Supreme Court 2000) AIR 2000 SC 828
K.R. Indira V Dr. G. Adinarayana (Supreme Court 2003) AIR 2003 SC 4689
M/s Rahul Builders V M/s Arihant Fertilizers & Anr. (Supreme Court 2007) (2008) 2 SCC 321
Kailash Verma vs. Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation & Anr.
Rajathi vs. C. Ganesan (1999) 6 SCC 326 : 1999 SCC (Cri) 1118)
Madhu Limave vs. State of Maharashtra
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.