JUDGMENT

Ajit Bharihoke, J. Citibank, N.A. the petitioner herein vide this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is seeking quashing of complaint case CC no. 113/1/06 titled "Partha Chatterjee Vs. Citibank, N.A. & Others" as also the summoning order dated 09.07.2007 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi wherein the petitioner Bank and others have been summoned to undergo trial for the offences punishable under Section 420 read with Section 511 IPC and Sections 467/471 IPC. The petitioner has also sought quashing of the order dated 14.05.2008 of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi issuing non-bailable warrants against the Branch Manager, Citibank, N.A., Connaught Circus, New Delhi.

2. Briefly stated, facts relevant for the disposal of this petition are that the petitioner Citibank filed a complaint under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act (for short N.I. Act) alleging that respondent No.2 Partha Chatterjee was given a loan vide Account No.LTB-DMS4436214. Respondent No.2 issued a cheque No.230874 dated 01.09.2003 drawn On HSBC Bank Ltd., Calcutta for a sum of Rs.25,97,768.2 towards repayment of one of the instalments of loan amount in respect of his liability. The said cheque was sent for encashment, but it was returned unpaid by the bankers of respondent No.2 vide memo dated 18.09.2003 with the remarks "Account closed". A"demand notice under Section 138 N.I. Act was served upon the respondent No.2, but he failed to pay the cheque amount within the requisite period of 30 days. This led to filing of the complaint by Citibank.

3. The concerned Metropolitan Magistrate, pursuant to the said complaint and the evidence led by Citibank summoned Partha Chatterjee/respondent No.2 to undergo trial for the offence under Section 138 N.I. Act. After the receipt of said summons, respondent No.2 filed a criminal complaint against Citibank and Others in the court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi, who assigned the complaint to the Metropolitan Magistrate concerned. In the said complaint, Partha Chatterjee claimed that he had borrowed a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- from Citibank, Calcutta against loan Account No.LTB-DMS-4436214 and as per the statement of account pertaining to aforesaid loan dated 19.04.2005, more than Rs.3,00,000/- was shown as due from respondent No.'.;.. Respondent No.2 also claimed in the complaint that at the time of sanction of said loan, the officials of the petitioner obtained some blank signed cheques, besides blank papers and unfilled forms. Respondent No.2 claims in his complaint that the petitioner, with dishonest intention, has forged one of those blank cheques bearing his signatures being cheque No.230874 dated 01.09.2003 drawn on HSBC Bank Ltd., Calcutta by converting it into a cheque of Rs.25,97,762.2 towards the payment of one of the instalments of loan Account No.LTB-DMS-4436214 it is also alleged in the complaint that aforesaid forgery has been done by the petitioner and others in collusion with each other to obtain wrongful gain.

4. Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, on consideration of the complaint and pre-summoning evidence found prima facie material disclosing the offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section If 51.1 IPC and sections 468 and 471 IPC against the petitioner and the others and he summoned, them accordingly vide impugned order dated 09.07.2007.

5. The Branch Manager, Citibank, Jeeven Bharti Building, Connaught Circus refused to accept the bailable warrants issued by the court for his appearance. Thus, vide order dated 14.05.2008, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi directed issuance of non-bailable warrants against accused No.2 for hearing dated 10.10.2008.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the complaint filed by respondent No.2 as well as the impugncd summoning order dated 09.07.2007 are liable to be quashed for the reason that the complaint as vell as preliminary evidence recorded by the learned Metropolitan Magistra