- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A.
(2.) This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated 23.01.2015 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 9, Aligarh in Complaint Case No. 637 of 2014, Umesh Chandra Garg Versus Virendra Kumar Gupta, under Section 138 N.I. Act, Police Station Delhi Gate, District Aligarh and the revisional order dated 11.12.2015 passed in Criminal Revision No. 156 of 2015, Virendra Kumar Gupta Versus State of U.P. and another.
(3.) Only point raised by learned counsel for the applicant is that Sections 138 and 142 of the N.I. Act prohibits the successive presentation of cheque. In support of his submission, the learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in Sadanandan Bhadran Versus Madhavan Sunil Kumar, 1998 JIC 1060, wherein it was held held that "on each presentation of the cheque and its dishonour a fresh right and not cause of action accrues in favour of the drawee. But he may, therefore, without taking pre-emptory action in exercise of his right under Clause (b) of Section 138, go on presenting the cheque so as to enable him to exercise such right at any point of time during the validity of the cheque. But once he gives a notice under clause (b) of Section 138 he forfeits such right for in case of failure of the drawer to pay the money within the stipulated time he would be liable for the offence and the cause of action for filing the complaint will arise.";