TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 772
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l proceeding in connection with C.C. Case No.568 of 2021 including the order taking cognizance dated 06.09.2021 whereby and where under the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella has taken cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 and the said case is now pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella. 3. The case of the complainant in brief is that the petitioner issued a cheque of Rs.1,26,500/- to the complainant. The same was presented by the complainant in bank on 01.05.2021 and on 24.05.2021 but the cheque stood dishonoured on the ground that the account was blocked. A notice for demanding payment of the cheque amount was sent to the petitioner on 04.06.202....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has not followed the provisions of law. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of T. T. Antony vs. State of Kerela & Others reported in (2001) 6 SCC 181 wherein in paragraph-27 it has been observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India that in case of fresh investigation based on the second or successive FIRs, not being a counter-case, filed in connection with the same or connected cognizable offence alleged to have been committed in the course of the same transaction and in respect of which pursuant to the first FIR either investigation is under way or Final Report under Section 173 (2) of Cr.P.C. has been forwarded to the Magistrate, may be a fit case for exercis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of no consequence and does not prohibit, a fresh complaint, after the offence is made out. Hence, it is submitted that no illegality having been committed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella- Kharsawan in Complaint Case No.568 of 2021, merely because the Complaint Case No.451 of 2021 was also filed by the complainant which has been dismissed being premature, is not a ground to quash the entire criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No.568 of 2021. It is next submitted that the undisputed fact remains that the petitioner issued a cheque of Rs.1,26,500/- to the complainant and the same was dishonoured and after notice of demand for payment of the said amount was issued by the petitioner the same has not been paid by the petit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The complaint filed by the complainant being Complaint Case No.451 of 2021 was erroneously filed by the complainant, because of the error of calculating the date of filing the complaint. 9. The question arises for consideration as to whether filing of a premature complaint debars, filing of a fresh complaint when the time becomes ripe to file the complaint? 10. The answer to the question is no more res integra as the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Yogendra Pratap Singh v. Savitri Pandey reported in (2014) 10 SCC 713 which was also relied upon by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Gajanad Burange vs. Laxmi Chand Goyal reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1711 wherein the Hon....