Jammu & Kashmir High Court – Srinagar Bench
Reyaz Ahmad Ganie vs Tanveer Ahamd Khan on 21 December, 2024
Author: Sanjay Dhar
Bench: Sanjay Dhar
55
Supplementary
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
CRM (M) No. 774/2024
CrlM No. 1795/2024
Reyaz Ahmad Ganie ..... Petitioner (s)
Through: Mr. Tariq M Shah, Adv.
V/s
Tanveer Ahamd Khan
..... Respondent(s)
Through:
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar, Judge.
ORDER
21.12.2024
1. The petitioner has challenged order dated 20.09.2023 passed by
the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shopian in a complaint
filed by the respondent against him alleging commission of
offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act,1881.
2. Heard and considered.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the legal
notice of demand issued by respondent against the petitioner was
never served upon him as the address mentioned in the postal
receipt was not correct. The learned counsel in order to buttress
Asif Gull
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
22.12.2024 21:14
Page |2
CRM (M) No. 774/2024
CrlM No. 1795/2024
his arguments, has submitted that after the process was issued
against the petitioner, the police agency in its report has clearly
stated that the petitioner is not residing at the address given in
the complaint and it is only when proclamation was issued
against the petitioner that he came to know about the pendency
of the complaint.
4. If we have a look at the documents annexed with the petition, the
address of the petitioner has been shown as son of Ghulam Qadir
GanieResident of Dangerpora, Shopian. In the post receipt also,
the address of the petitioner is shown as Resident of Dangerpora,
Shopian.
5. The claim of the petitioner is that there are two Villages by the
name Dangerpora in District Shopian. The petitioner resides in
Village Makani Dangerpora whereas the process issued against
the petitioner was sent to a different Village which is also known
by the name of Dangerpora.
6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner resides in Village
Dangerpora. The question whether the notice of demand was
sent to the Village Dangerpora where the petitioner actually
resides or to a different Village by the same name, is a matter of
trial and cannot be gone into by this Court in these proceedings.
Asif Gull
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
22.12.2024 21:14
Page |3
CRM (M) No. 774/2024
CrlM No. 1795/2024
7. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in the petition. The
same is accordingly dismissed leaving it open to the petitioner to
raise this issue before the learned trial Magistrate at an
appropriate stage.
(Sanjay Dhar)
Judge
SRINAGAR
21.12.2024
Aasif
Asif Gull
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
22.12.2024 21:14
[ad_1]
Source link