Naheed Ara Moonis, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
(2.) The instant application has been filed invoking the inherent power of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceeding pursuant to the summoning orde dated 10.2.2015 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Varanasi in Complaint Case No.15 of 2015 (Vivek Chandak Vs. Smt. Parvati Kesari), under Section 138 of the Act (hereinafter referred as "Act", P.S. Kotwali, District Varanasi.
(3.) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the opposite party no.2 has business of ready made clothes in Varanasi while the applicant is doing work as supplier of tea. It is alleged in the complaint filed by the opposite party no.2 that the applicant had borrowed three lacs rupees to release the bank bill and assured that the same will be returned back within a month. As the applicant's son was close friend of the opposite party no.2, the amount was paid to the applicant. After expiry of the stipulated period the opposite party no.2 demanded the aforesaid amount from the applicant who only made assurance that it will be returned soon. Later on assured that a cheque will be given to him (the complainant) which will be encashed by him after 15 days. Pursuant to which a cheque no.000125 was issued by the applicant for a sum of Rs.3 lacs on 10.9.2014 to the complainant drawn on Bank of India, Lohatiya Branch, Varanasi. Thereafter the aforesaid cheque issued by the applicant was presented by the opposite party no.2 before the said bank which was returned with the remark that fund is insufficient in the account of the applicant. This information was received by the opposite party no.2 on 1.11.2014. After receipt of the dishonour cheque a legal demand notice was sent to the applicant, within 30 days of the receipt of the information from the bank. The applicant was required to make the payment within 30 days of the said notice. Despite the notice was duly served on 5.12.2014 the applicant did not make any payment nor sent any reply, hence liable to be prosecuted for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act and Section 420 IPC. Pursuant to the aforesaid complaint the complainant has submitted his affidavit under Section 200 Cr.P.C. which reiterated the version of the complainant and original cheque returned receipt of registered notice, bank memo and other documents were filed under Section 202 Cr.P.C. as documentary proof.;