AKHILESH SARAF Vs. USHA TIWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is in second round of litigation. Respondent had filed a complaint case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 against the petitioner on accusation that he had business dealings with him and during the course of business dealings, he had given him an account payee cheque of Rs. 3,70,000/- dated 15.05.2007 drawn on State Bank of Indore Branch purported to be signed by S.K. Saraf as proprietor of M/s Vinayak Herbal.

(2.) The petitioner, on being summoned by the trial Court, produced a copy of the bank statement to prima facie show that he was neither a signatory to the cheque in question nor he was the proprietor of the firm on whose behalf the cheque in question was issued in favour of the complainant. Since the Court below had taken cognizance against the petitioner, the petitioner challenged the said cognizance order in case being M. Cr.C. No. 8083/2009 which was disposed of by this Court vide its order dated 26.11.09 reserving opportunity for the petitioner to move a fresh application before the trial Court for review of cognizance order stating the details on the basis of which he claims that he has not committed any offence. The trial Court was directed by this Court vide its earlier order to pass fresh order on merits without being influenced with the fact of taking cognizance against the petitioner. Pursuant to the said earlier order of this Court, the petitioner filed application before the trial Court for recall of cognizance order and this application has been dismissed by the trial court vide impugned order dated 20.03.2010. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner has filed this petition.

(3.) I have heard the arguments of the learned Counsel for the petitioner and also of Mr. Amit Lahoti appearing on behalf of the respondent/complainant.