AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.—Invoking the provisions of Section 482 Cr.PC, the petitioners Arjun Bahal and his mother Neeraj Behal have sought the quashing of criminal complaint (Annexure P1) u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, summoning order dated 8.5.2009 (Annexure P2) and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, mainly, on the ground that the cheque in question was issued on behalf of M/s Jai Traders-respondent No. 2, respondent No. 3 is the sole proprietor of the Firm and the petitioners have nothing to do with that concern. 2. The present petition came up for hearing on 7.7.2010 and a Coordinate Bench of this Court (Gurdev Singh, J.) passed the following order:
Heard.
It has been submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioners that the cheque in question was issued on behalf of M/s Jai Traders, Basti Sheikh, Jalandhar-respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 3 is the sole proprietor of that and that the petitioners are nothing to do with that concern. He has tried to place reliance upon the certificate issued by the Citizens Urban Co-operative Bank Limited.
Let a certified copy issued by the authority with which this concern was got registered, be filed. Now, to come up on 30.7.2010.
Ultimately, the case was adjourned to 6.8.2010 and no document as required was placed on record by the petitioners and further adjournment was requested, which was granted. The case was adjourned for today.
Today, the learned Counsel for the petitioners has flatly refused and conceded that he is unable to place on record certificate issued by the Co-operative Bank to prove the innocence of the petitioners. In this view of the matter and in the absence of such certificate, the learned Counsel for the petitioners did not point out any cogent ground for quashing the complaint and summoning order at this primary stage of the proceedings.
In the light of the aforesaid reasons and without commenting anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of the trial of the case, the instant petition is hereby dismissed in the obtaining circumstances of the case.
Needless to say, the petitioners would be at liberty to reiterate the grounds at the time of trial in accordance with law.