JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. T. T. Tara, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. L. Hage, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the respondent no. 1 as well as Mr. T. Taison, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.

2. This criminal petition has been registered on filing of an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the petitioners, namely, (1) Sri Jit Chabukdhara, (2) Sri Goutam Bhattacharya, and (3) Sri Sumit Agarwal, praying for quashing of the proceeding of the CR Case No. 69/2022 under Sections 420/465/34 of the Indian Penal Code, which is pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Capital Complex, Yupia, Arunachal Pradesh.

3. The facts relevant for consideration of the instant criminal petition, in brief, are as follow:-

(i) That the present petitioners, namely, (1) Sri Jit Chabukdhara, is working as Sales Manager, (2) Sri Goutam Bhattacharya, is working as Senior General Manager, and (3) Sri Sumit Agarwal, is working as Sales Accountant in a company called M/s Maithan Steel and Power Limited, having its registered office at 9 A J C Bose Road, 6th Floor, Kolkata, West Bengal.

In the year 2019, the petitioner nos. 2 & 3 contacted respondent no. 2 and informed him about their Company M/s Maithan Steel and Power Limited which is manufacturing TMT bar (Iron rods and wires) and expressed their willingness to establish wholesale dealership company in the Arunachal Pradesh. After threadbare discussion and on good faith both the parties agreed to enter into the business relationship and for that purpose respondent no. 2 had submitted his Aadhar Card, GST Registration, Trading License and PAN Card. The petitioners’ company after verification and authentication of the documents furnished by respondent no. 2 started supplying and delivering TMT bars and wires to the firm of respondent no. 2 namely, M/s Yayo Enterprise from time to time. The respondent no. 2 also made regular payment to the company as per the goods received from the company.

(ii) However, as per the ledger account of M/s Yayo Enterprise maintained by petitioners’ company from 01.04.2018 to 31.03.2022, an outstanding liability of the firm of the respondent No. 2 was shown in the closing balance of the account of the ledger account as Rs.11,48,651/- only. The petitioners, on behalf of their company, made several communications over telephone to the respondent no. 2 about non-payment of the legally enforceable debt of Rs.11,48,651/-. However, as the respondent no. 2 did not respond to the said telephonic calls, a legal notice dated 01.04.2022 was issued to the respondent no. 2 which was received by the respondent no. 2 on 13.04.2022 as per the courier track status. In pursuant to the said legal notice dated 01.04.2022, the respondent no. 2 issued a cheque bearing no. 678866 dated 01.06.2022 amounting to Rs. 11,48,651/- in favour of the petitioners’ company which was duly signed by the respondent no. 2.

(iii) On receipt of the said cheque, the authorized persons of the company presented to same to their banker State Bank of India, Asansol Branch for encashment. However, the bank had issued a memorandum dated 07.06.2022 to the applicant company, whereby it was intimated that the cheque was not honored due to “drawer refused to confirm issuance of cheque and asked not to debit his account + the account had insufficient funds”. It is averted by the petitioners in their petition that when the authorized persons of company contacted the respondent no. 2 and informed him about dishonor of cheque bearing no. 678866, he requested the authorized persons to present the cheque in Bank once again and accordingly, the cheque was again presented to their banker Punjab National Bank, Larj Corporate Branch on 10.06.2022 for encashment. However, this time also the cheque was dishonored on the ground of insufficiency of fund. Thereafter, the applicants’ company issued a demand notice to the respondent for the legally e