TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (4) TMI 609
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....truments Act (hereinafter referred to as Act for convenience). 2. The respondent No. 2 filed a complaint by alleging that the petitioner issued following cheques to him and when they were presented for encashment, were dishonoured. 1. Cheque No. 58534, dated 15.3.1998 for Rs. 17,005/- 2. Cheque No. 58535, dated 15.4.1998 for Rs. 17,005/-. 3. Cheque No. 58536, dated 15.5.1998 for Rs. 17,005/-. 4. Cheque No. 58537, dated 15.6.1998 for Rs. 17,005/-. 5. Cheque No. 58538, dated 15.7.1998 for Rs. 17,005/-. The respondent No. 2 complained, that by dishonouring of the cheques the petitioner committed the offence punishable under Secti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not in use of the petitioner when the present crime is alleged to have taken place, as per the case of the complainant. 4. In context with freezing of the bank accounts and sealing of Office, a petition was moved before this Court, which was initially heard by the Single Bench and it was referred to the Division Bench consisting V.P. Tipnis and Palkar, JJ who quashed the seizing of the car, sealing of office and freezing of bank accounts of the petitioner. It was challenged in the Supreme court and the Supreme court granted stay to the judgment and order of the Division Bench as quoted above. Shri Pradhan submitted that the accounts of the petitioner are still frozen. 5. Shri Pradhan submitted that the petitioner did not commit offen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t it exceeds the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with that bank, such person shall be deemed to have committed an offence and shall without prejudice to any other provisions of this Act, be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to twice the amount of the cheque, or with both: Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply unless- (a) the cheque has been presented to the bank within a period of six months from the date on which it is drawn or within the period of its validity whichever is earlier. &nbs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er came in existence, that is on 24/3/1999. By pointing out this situation Shri Pradhan had submitted that as the said order which was passed by the Chief Metropolitan, Magistrate, Mumbai was not challenged anywhere, the said order attained finality and, therefore, the issuance of the cheques, which are the subject matter of the present prosecution, and which transaction is the pivotal point of the prosecution, was answered to be a dispute of civil nature by a competent criminal Court and, therefore, the respondent No. 2 should not have filed the present complaint and the learned Magistrate should not have taken cognizance thereof. 10. Shri Pradhan submitted that the complainant should have come to the Court with clean hands and should h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed before it. On account of laches on the part of the original complainant (respondent No. 2) the learned Court had issued the process against the petitioner as it was unable to analyse the allegations made in the complaint and was put to handicaps in arriving at a proper conclusion. On account of such laches the cause of the complaint deserves to suffer and it should suffer finally. 12. Every prosecution, which is the result of the cognizance taken of the complaint results in hardship, agony and expenditure to the indicated person. He is required to appear before the Court and for that in normal and in major cases, he has to engage a lawyer which would make him to spend a significant amount of money. For appearing before the Court he ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as they are available in the record for perusal. Had the original complainant obeyed the said order of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mumbai and had those cheques been returned, there would not have been any cause for him to file the present complaint. But the conduct of the original complainant was totally different and that resulted in the order which has been assailed by the petitioner by this petition. 14. When the Court of competent jurisdiction directs a person to return the cheques to drawer, he has to obey the said order, if that was not challenged by him in higher forums. In such case or cases he does not have any right to present those cheques for encashment. If he presents such cheques in violation of such order, then he c....