Saumitra Dayal Singh, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Swapnil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.N.Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State as also perused the record.
(2.) The present application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. arises from the First Information Report dated 01.09.2017 in Case Crime No. 949 of 2017, under Sections 420 and 406 I.P.C., Police Station Nai Mandi, District Muzaffar Nagar (instituted in pursuance of the order passed on application filed under section 156(3) Cr.P.C.), being Criminal Case No. 4811/9 of 2017 (State of U.P. Vs. Pawan Kumar), pending in the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Muzaffar Nagar.
(3.) According to the F.I.R. version, the opposite party no.2 had a pre-existing social relationship with the applicant, who was engaged in trading in 'Gur' in the name and style M/s Om Prakash & Ajay Kumar, at Kukda Mandi, Muzaffar Nagar. Further, the applicant approached the opposite party no.2 in March, 1996 to borrow Rs. 2,00,000/- with a promise to return such money within a period of one month, failing which he agreed to pay interest @ 18%, compounded at monthly rests. The opposite party no.2 also disclosed having believed and acted on the representation so made by the applicant. He thus lent a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- through two cheque drawn on the bank account of his wife, for Rs. 1,00,000/- each. Those were cleared and the amount credited in favour of the applicant on 15.03.1996. Thereafter, it has been alleged, the opposite party no.2 repeatedly asked for return of the aforesaid money. It was never returned; the applicant thereafter left Muzaffar Nagar and started residing at Ghaziabad which address was not known to the opposite party; upon some efforts, the opposite party no.2 learnt of the mobile number used by the applicant; he contacted the applicant on that number when the latter promised to return the money to the opposite party no.2 but that he continued to dilly-dally, on one pretext or the other. Though the money was never returned by the applicant, on the application filed under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C., the aforesaid FIR was registered under Sections 420 and 406 I.P.C. It was also disclosed in that F.I.R. that the applicant had refused to return the money and in fact he issued a notice to the opposite party no.2 making false allegation therein.;