2019 (2) TMI 393

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or purchase of its flat bearing No. 55, 3^rd Floor, Sukhdev Vihar, New Delhi. After negotiation, Lotus Floriculture Pvt. Ltd. agreed to sell the above flat for a total consideration of Rs. 2,20,00,000/- and in consequence, the respondent paid a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- in cash and Rs. 40,00,000/- through RTGS from the account of M/s Get Post Investment and Finance Service Ltd. and thereafter on 17.05.2013 an Agreement to sell and purchase was executed by the petitioner on behalf of Lotus Floriculture Pvt. Ltd. The property under sell was lying mortgaged with HDFC as a collateral security for corporate guarantee given to M/s. Visa Koje Tradevision Pvt. Ltd. by Lotus Floriculture Pvt. Ltd. and was to be redeemed as soon as the respondent conveyed his readiness to pay the balance amount which the respondent agreed to pay. However, the respondent on the pretext that the company might fail to redeem the property in time due to non-payment by Visa Koje to the bank, demanded security for the earnest money paid. Therefore, Lotus Floriculture Pvt. Ltd. issued an undated cheque bearing No. 003858 drawn on Union Bank of India, Kailash Colony, New Delhi for Rs. 60,00,000/- without mentioning ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the afore-mentioned orders dated 17.11.2014 06.05.2017 and 01.06.2018 and also the proceedings which are pending before the Trial Court. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on the query of the Court, admitted that the cheque bears the signatures of the petitioner but however, submitted that the petitioner was not a Director at the time of issuance/ signing of the cheque and the same was without consideration, therefore, he is not liable to make the payment or even to be summoned in the matter. 8. Now, this Court would like to deal with firstly, the order dated 17.11.2014. The order dated 17.11.2014 has been assailed now, after more than four years of the passing of the said impugned order. There is neither any plausible explanation nor any sufficient cause in the petition to approach this Court after such an inordinate delay. I have no hesitation to hold that if the Court fails to take into consideration delay and laches, while invoking the powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr. PC, without any reasonable ground, there would be no end to the litigation, as a consequence whereof, neither any trial would be proceeded nor any trial would be concluded before th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ucceed, by establishing his defences by producing evidence in accordance with law. There is an endless list of judgments rendered by this Court declaring the legal position, that in a case where the prosecution/complainant has levelled allegations bringing out all ingredients of the charge(s) levelled, and have placed material before the Court, prima facie evidencing the truthfulness of the allegations levelled, trial must be held. 29. The issue being examined in the instant case is the jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482of the Cr.P.C., if it chooses to quash the initiation of the prosecution against an accused, at the stage of issuing process, or at the stage of committal, or even at the stage of framing of charges. These are all stages before the commencement of the actual trial. The same parameters would naturally be available for later stages as well. The power vested in the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., at the stages referred to hereinabove, would have far reaching consequences, inasmuch as, it would negate the prosecution's/complainant's case without allowing the prosecution/complainant to lead evidence. Such a determination must always be rende....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....me of signing of the cheque or the same is without consideration cannot be evaluated, appreciated or decided at this stage which requires recording of the oral and documentary evidence which can be recorded only in accordance with law at the appropriate stage. 15. A perusal of the said impugned order demonstrates that the Trial Court had perused the material on record, applied its judicial mind and prima facie found that offence under Section 138 of the NI Act appears to have been committed and further took cognizance of the offence under Section 138 and issued summons to the accused Nos.1 to 4. It also stands borne-out from the said impugned order that the Trial Court applied its judicial mind in holding that no case is made out against accused Nos.5 and 6 and they were not summoned and for that reason, the complaint against the accused Nos.5 and 6 was dismissed. I also concur with the aforesaid findings in view of the material on record moreso in view of the fact that the impugned cheque admittedly bears the signature of the petitioner. Hence, even on merits, this Court finds no infirmity or flaw in the impugned order dated 17.11.2014. 16. The petitioner has also challenged....