- (1.) The petitioners have challenged the judgment and order dated January 30, 2015 passed by Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Fast Track Court, Bichar Bhawan, Calcutta in Criminal Revision No.21 of 2014 whereby Learned Additional Sessions Judge affirmed the order dated November 6, 2013 passed by Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 10th Court, Calcutta in complaint Case No.C3302 of 2012, in the instant revisional application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
(2.) The opposite party being the complainant filed a petition of complaint before the Court of Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta against the petitioners alleging commission of offence under Section 138/141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. In the year 2008 there was a business deal between the opposite party and the petitioners and in discharge of the existing legal liability, the petitioners issued the account payee cheque bearing no.045747 dated 01.11.2011 for Rs.65 lakh and cheque no.045748 dated 16.11.2011 for Rs.1 crore 30 lakh drawn on Punjab and Sind Bank, 8, Old Court House Street, Calcutta-700001 in favour of the opposite party company. On December 21, 2011 those cheques were dishonoured on presentation before HDFC Bank, Stephen House Branch, Calcutta-700001. The demand notice for payment was given by the opposite party company on January 19, 2012, but no payment was made within 15 days from the receipt of the said notice. Accordingly, the opposite party company started the criminal case against the petitioners, which was registered as Case No.C3302 of 2012.
(3.) On March 29, 2012, Learned Magistrate conducted the inquiry under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and considered the affidavit filed by the opposite party company and being satisfied about the prima facie offence under Section 138/141 of the N.I. Act, issued process against the petitioners fixing April 17, 2012 for appearance. All the Petitioners appeared in due course before the Court of Learned Magistrate, except the petitioner no.4 who filed an application before Learned Magistrate for non-compliance of the provision of Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by Learned Magistrate. The petitioner no.4 made specific prayer for discharge of the petitioners on the ground that Learned Magistrate did not conduct any inquiry under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in spite of the fact that the petitioner no.4 resides beyond the territorial jurisdiction of Learned Magistrate. However, on May 14, 2013 Learned Magistrate allowed the prayer of the petitioner no.4 and discharged all the petitioners from the case and directed the officer-in-charge of Hare Street Police Station to conduct inquiry under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and submit report on June 14, 2013. Ultimately, the officer-incharge of Hare Street Police Station submitted the report before the Court of Learned Magistrate on July 2, 2013 and Learned Magistrate again issued process against the petitioners on being satisfied that a prima facie case is made out against the petitioners under Section 138/141 of the N.I. Act. The order dated November 6, 2013 by which Learned Magistrate issued process against petitioners was challenged before Learned Additional Sessions Judge by way of filing Criminal Revision No.21 of 2014. Learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the Criminal Revision by affirming the order passed by Learned Magistrate. Accordingly, the petitioners have challenged the order passed by Learned Additional Sessions in Criminal Revision No.21 of 2014.;