1. The instant revision is for impugning the order dated 13.4.2006 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vidisha in Criminal Case No. 688/ 05, whereby the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against the petitioner for the offence punishabe under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

2. Shri Bharadwaj for the petitioner has drawn attention at page 2 and 3 of the agreement dated 27.10.2004 and has submitted that as per this agreement to sale, Rs. 65,000/- were received by the petitioner from the respondent and for security the cheque of Rs. 65,000/- was given to the respondent. Hence as observed in Jitendra Singh Flora v. Ravikant Talwar [2001 (1) MPLJ 229] he cannot be held responsible under section 138 of the Act.

3. Countering the contention, Shri Rajput has submitted that as per the aforesaid agreement petitioner was to execute the sale-deed or to return the amount. Neither he returned the amount nor he executed sale-deed. When the amount was claimed he permitted to receive the amount from the bank through the aforesaid cheque. About the same he has averred in para 3 & 4 of the complaint.

4. To appreciate the contentio