SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(J&K) 921

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
Sanjay Kumar Gupta, J.
Rajneesh Garg (Director) - Petitioner
Versus
Romesh Kumar Mengi - Respondent
561-A Cr.P.C. No. 23 of 2007 and MP No. 28 of 2007
decided On : 28-09-2017

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Ashish Upadhayay, Advocate
For the Respondents:Mr. Ajay Kr. Gandotra, Advocate

Important Point – Holder of cheque can present it before a bank any number of times during period of its validity.

Headnote:Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 – Section 138 & 420 RPC – Jammu and Kashmir Code of Criminal Procedure, 1989 – Section 561 – A – Dishonour of cheque – Cheating – Quashing petition – Holder of cheque can present it before a bank any number of times during period of its validity – Grounds taken in petition that complaint was not maintainable after issuance of second notice, is not tenable – Cheques were presented two times within six month from date of issuance of cheques in its validity period – All factual narrations in this petition are required to be proved by petitioner before Court below during trial – Petitioner has not denied that both cheques do not bear his signatures – Order of Court below in taking cognizance affirmed – Petition dismissed. (Paras 11, 12 and 13)

       Result – Petition dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

1. Through the medium of instant petition filed under Section 561-A Cr.P.C., petitioner seeks quashing of criminal complaint titled ‘Romesh Kumar Mengi Vs. Rajneesh Garg’ instituted by respondent under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act & 420 RPC against the petitioner, pending before learned Munsiff, Reasi. Petitioner also seeks quashing of summoning order dated 04.12.2006 issued by learned Munsiff, Reasi.

2. Petitioner has stated in instant petition that respondent has instituted a complaint titled as Romesh Kumar Mengi Vs. Rajneesh Garg’ under Section 138 NI Act and under Section 420 RPC against the petitioner, which is pending trial in the Court of Munsiff, Reasi and the Court took cognizance on the said complaint and issued summons to the petitioner. That the petitioner is a Director of M/s Focus Technology (India) Pvt. Ltd. having its office at 27-A, Zamrudpur Behing Kailash Apartment, Kailash Colony, New Delhi-110048 and the company is into the business of Networking and Software Solution for the companies. The petitioner is having interest in Astrology and out of his interest only keeps on attending classes on the aforesaid subject all around India whenever given a chance. That the petitioner came into contact with one Sh. Vijay Verma, who is a resident of Jammu and a professional in the field of Astrology. After both petitioner and Vijay Verma developed friendship, the petitioner was invited by the said Vijay Verma to attend the classes on the subject of astrology in his institute in Jammu. The petitioner thereafter went to attend a short term course on Astrology in Jammu where the petitioner was introduced to respondent No.1 by Vijay Verma, who was the co-brother of respondent No.1. That as the ward of respondent No.1 failed to crack the entrance of MBBS course, respondent No.1 and his co-brother namely Vijay Verma asked the petitioner to help the ward of respondent No.1 to get admission in MBBS course. The co-brother being the teacher of the petitioner and under obligation, without any monetary benefits, the petitioner referred respondent No.1 to his friend namely Sh. Shyam Garg for admission of the ward of respondent No.1 and Sh. Sham Garg referred the petitioner to Sh. Shailesh Chobhey being an education consultant. That respondent No.1 himself contacted the said Shailesh Chobey in Pune on telephone and after respondent No.1 got satisfied, the petitioner along with respondent No.1 and his co-brother Sh. Vijay Verma went to Pune to meet Shailesh Choubey regarding the admission of his ward in MBBS course in DY Patil, Pune College but despite all efforts the college authorities refused to admit the ward of respondent No.1 as the admission process was over and moreover the ward of respondent No.1 had failed to crack the preliminary examination of MBBS. That thereafter the petitioner came back to Delhi and respondent No.1 along with his co-brother went back to Jammu. Respondent No.1 himself always remained in contact with said Shailesh Choubey and respondent No.1 proposed Shailesh Choubey for getting the admission of his ward in the same academic year after paying the donation to the management of the college. Shailesh Choubey told respondent No.1 that the only possibility of getting the admission of the ward of respondent No.1 is in DY Patil Medical College, Kolhapur after paying the donation and for the same purpose Sh. Kailash Choubey introduced respondent No.1 to one Sh. I. B. Pandey. Upon this, respondent No.1 along with his co-brother and cash reached at Pune and from there by road went to DY Patil Medical College, Kolhapur, where they met Sh. I.B. Pandey and even the college authorities of DY Patil Medical College, Kolhapur, refused to give admission to the ward of respondent No.1 in MBBS course as the same not possible. Thereafter, all aforesaid persons i.e. respondent No.1, Vijay Verma, ward of respondent No.1 namely Sh. Shourab Mengi and Sh. I. B. Pandey came back to Pune and Sh. Vijay Verma f






































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top