JUDGMENT :

Rajesh Bhardwaj, J.

Present petition has been filed praying for setting aside the orders dated 07.06.2024 and 29.07.2024 (Annexures P-15 & P-17) passed by the learned Special Railway Magistrate-cum-Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ambala vide which the proclamation has been issued and petitioner has been declared as proclaimed person in complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act titled as M/s Adhunik Crop Care vs. Unique Traders numbered as COMA/2901/2019 dated 03.10.2019 in an illegal, arbitrary manner and without following the due process as mandated under the Act.

2. Precise submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was prosecuted in the complaint bearing COMA/2901/2019 filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He has submitted that the complainant had given the raw material to the petitioner of Rs.3,64,000/- and the petitioner issued a cheque bearing No.875934 amounting to Rs.3,64,894 dated 08.08.2019 to the complainant. He has submitted that the said cheque was returned to the complainant as dishonored by the Bank with the remarks "Funds Insufficient". He has submitted that the complainant has filed the complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act in the Court of learned Special Railway Magistrate-cum-Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ambala against the petitioner on false and frivolous allegations. He has submitted that after filing the complaint, notice was issued to the petitioner by way of RC for 16.04.2020 and thereafter in view of the Covid-19 Pandemic, the matter was adjourned time and again. He has submitted that on 26.08.2021 when the matter was taken up, it was brought to the notice of the Court that notice to the petitioner was not issued as RC was not filed and thus directions were issued to counsel for the complainant to file the same within a week and thereafter fresh notice was ordered to be issued for 25.03.2022. He has submitted that on 25.03.2022, the petitioner remained unserved and in view of the same, bailable warrants in the sum of Rs.5000/- with one surety in the like amount against the petitioner were issued for 19.09.2022. He has submitted that thereafter on 19.09.2022, fresh bailable warrants were issued against the petitioner in the sum of Rs.5000/- with one surety in the like amount against the petitioner for 27.10.2022. He has further submitted that on 27.10.2022, bailable warrants were received back unserved with the report of left address and thus, on the same day i.e. 27.10.2022, non-bailable warrants were issued against the petitioner for 12.01.2023 and thereafter for 13.04.2023, 06.11.2023, 09.02.2024, 20.05.2024, 07.06.2024. He has submitted that on 07.06.2024, the trial Court without considering the fact, issued the proclamation against the petitioner for 11.07.2024. He has submitted that on 29.07.2024, the petitioner was declared proclaimed person. He has submitted that without considering the service report in which it was mentioned that 'Riyasat Hussain is not served at the address', the trial Court straight away proceeded to declare the petitioner as proclaimed person. He has submitted that the notices issued to the petitioner were never received by him as he was never residing on the address as mentioned in the complaint filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and also the name mentioned in the complaint was wrong, thus the same could not be served. He has submitted that the petitioner came to know about the present proceedings when the police raided the shop of the petitioner and this fact was apprised to the petitioner by his neighbours as he was in hospital at Delhi due to illness of his wife, who was suffering from Breast Cancer. He has submitted that the petitioner is old aged man and he has no role to play and has been falsely implicated in the present complaint. He has fairly submitted that the petitioner is ready to appear before the trial Court where the complaint is now pe