Pankaj Kumar Agarwal vs M/S. Panchiram Nahata on 4 July, 2025

0
2


1. The instant revision revolves around an application with a

prayer for quashment of proceedings being case no.

CN/470/2020 under Sections 420/406/120B of the Indian

Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as IPC), presently pending

before the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate, 8th Court, Calcutta.

Backdrop:-

2. The genesis of the impugned proceeding is a complaint made

by the opposite party herein against the petitioners before the

Court of Ld. Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (for short

A.C.M.M). Calcutta alleging inter alia that the opposite party

provided a loan of Rs. 15 lacs through RTGS along with interest

@ 17% per annum purely on a short term basis i.e. a period of

120 days from October 25, 2011. Thereafter, the said loan was

renewed from time to time for a period of 120 days each and

upon every renewal fresh cheques were issued and previous

cheques were replaced. But on one occasion when the

petitioner had issued cheques to the opposite party towards

payment of principal amount, the said cheques were returned

dishonored with remarks „funds insufficient‟. Thereafter, on

22.01.2020 when the opposite party demanded the principle

amount from the petitioner, the petitioner refused to pay such

amount and as a sequel a legal notice dated 04.02.2020 was

sent by the opposite party to the petitioner. Since an amount of

Rs. 15,00,000/- had been lying due in respect of refund of

principal amount, the opposite party filed a complaint alleging

commission of offences under Section 406/420/120B of the

IPC against the petitioner wherein the Ld. A.C.M.M. was

pleased to take cognizance of the said complaint vide order

dated 29.06.2020 and transferred the same to the Court of Ld.

Metropolitan Magistrate, 8th Court, Calcutta for disposal. Ld.

Magistrate issued summons and examined one witness under

Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short CrPC)

and accordingly issued process against the petitioner. Being

aggrieved with the impugned proceeding, the petitioner

approached this Court with a prayer for exercise of inherent

jurisdiction.



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here