Chattisgarh High Court
Agrawal Global Infratech Private ... vs Balaji Construction on 21 January, 2025
1
2025:CGHC:3780
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRMP No. 470 of 2023
• Agrawal Global Infratech Private Limited Through Director Rakesh
Kumar Agrawal, Aged About 46 Years, S/o Shri Dhanpat Agrawal,
Registered Office C - 2-101, Aishwarya Chamber, Telibanda, G.E. Road,
District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
... Petitioner(s)
versus
• Balaji Construction Through Partner Dhurv Kumar Agrawal Aged About
49 Years, S/o Shri, Mahaveer Prasad Agrawa, R/o Ward No. 5,
Baradwar, Sakti, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Petitioner : Mr. Aditya Tiwari, Advocate.
For Respondent : Ms. Priyanka Rai, Advocate.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge
Order on Board
21.01.2025
1. The present petition is filed for quashment of the proceedings initiated
against the petitioner by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sakti,
District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Case No.1117/2022.
2. Relevant facts for disposal of this petition is that respondent
/complainant filed a complaint case under section 138 of Negotiable
Instrument Act, 1881 (for short, 'NI Act') against the petitioner's
company alleging that on 01.11.2022 the petitioner has drawn a cheque
bearing no.514298 of Rs.30,10,201/- (Thirty lakhs ten thousand two
hundred and one rupees) of State Bank of India against the outstanding
amount of purchase of bitumen, however, when the said was drawn by
one M/s. Sunil Kumar Soni, it got dishonored due to insufficient
amount/fund. Based upon complaint, learned JMFC, Sakti has
registered the case against the petitioner on 24.12.2022. hence, this
petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned JMFC erred in
registering the case against the petitioner as the petitioner is neither the
account holder of the concerned bank account nor he issued the said
cheque. He further submits that the allegation of the complainant even if
taken in its entirety it does not reflect the commission of any offence on
the part of the petitioner as there is no ingredients of Section 138 of N.I.
Act. Hence, he prayed that this petition may be allowed and quash the
case registered against the petitioner and pending in Case No.
1117/2022 before learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sakti. Learned
counsel also submits that the petitioner may be exempted from
personal appearance before the trial Court and he may be permitted to
appear through the Counsel. In support of his contention, learned
Counsel places reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in case of Aparna A. Shah versus Sheth Developers
Pvt Ltd, (2013) 8 SCC 71.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent opposes the submission of counsel
for the petitioner and would submits that based on evidence/material
available, learned JMFC has rightly taken the cognizance against the
petitioner/accused alongwith co-accused Sunil Kumar Soni under
Section 138 of NI Act, which does not call for any interference.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents
available placed on record.
6. Perusal of documents shows that cheque in question has been issued
by M/s. Sunil Kumar Soni in the name of respondent/Shree Balaji
Constructions, however, M/s. Sunil Kumar Soni is not the party before
the trial Court in complaint case under Section 138 of NI Act. Learned
trial Court has taken the cognizance against the petitioner on
24.12.2022 and as per the pleadings/documents petitioner did not file
any application against the said cognizance before the trial Court,
hence, this Court is of the considered view that this petition may be
disposed of permitting the petitioner to file appropriate application
before the trial Court.
7. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to file an
appropriate application before the trial Court concerned and raised
objection regarding cognizance taken against him. On submission of
such application, trial Court shall consider and decide the same in
accordance with law/rules preferably within '04 months' from the date of
receipt of such application.
CC as per rules.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Arvind Kumar Verma)
Judge
J/-
