1 2025:CGHC:3780 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRMP No. 470 of 2023 • Agrawal Global Infratech Private Limited Through Director Rakesh Kumar Agrawal, Aged About 46 Years, S/o Shri Dhanpat Agrawal, Registered Office C - 2-101, Aishwarya Chamber, Telibanda, G.E. Road, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus • Balaji Construction Through Partner Dhurv Kumar Agrawal Aged About 49 Years, S/o Shri, Mahaveer Prasad Agrawa, R/o Ward No. 5, Baradwar, Sakti, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Aditya Tiwari, Advocate. For Respondent : Ms. Priyanka Rai, Advocate. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 21.01.2025 1. The present petition is filed for quashment of the proceedings initiated against the petitioner by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Case No.1117/2022. 2. Relevant facts for disposal of this petition is that respondent /complainant filed a complaint case under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (for short, ‘NI Act’) against the petitioner’s company alleging that on 01.11.2022 the petitioner has drawn a cheque bearing no.514298 of Rs.30,10,201/- (Thirty lakhs ten thousand two 2 hundred and one rupees) of State Bank of India against the outstanding amount of purchase of bitumen, however, when the said was drawn by one M/s. Sunil Kumar Soni, it got dishonored due to insufficient amount/fund. Based upon complaint, learned JMFC, Sakti has registered the case against the petitioner on 24.12.2022. hence, this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned JMFC erred in registering the case against the petitioner as the petitioner is neither the account holder of the concerned bank account nor he issued the said cheque. He further submits that the allegation of the complainant even if taken in its entirety it does not reflect the commission of any offence on the part of the petitioner as there is no ingredients of Section 138 of N.I. Act. Hence, he prayed that this petition may be allowed and quash the case registered against the petitioner and pending in Case No. 1117/2022 before learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sakti. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner may be exempted from personal appearance before the trial Court and he may be permitted to appear through the Counsel. In support of his contention, learned Counsel places reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Aparna A. Shah versus Sheth Developers Pvt Ltd, (2013) 8 SCC 71. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent opposes the submission of counsel for the petitioner and would submits that based on evidence/material available, learned JMFC has rightly taken the cognizance against the petitioner/accused alongwith co-accused Sunil Kumar Soni under 3 Section 138 of NI Act, which does not call for any interference. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available placed on record. 6. Perusal of documents shows that cheque in question has been issued by M/s. Sunil Kumar Soni in the name of respondent/Shree Balaji Constructions, however, M/s. Sunil Kumar Soni is not the party before the trial Court in complaint case under Section 138 of NI Act. Learned trial Court has taken the cognizance against the petitioner on 24.12.2022 and as per the pleadings/documents petitioner did not file any application against the said cognizance before the trial Court, hence, this Court is of the considered view that this petition may be disposed of permitting the petitioner to file appropriate application before the trial Court. 7. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to file an appropriate application before the trial Court concerned and raised objection regarding cognizance taken against him. On submission of such application, trial Court shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law/rules preferably within ‘04 months’ from the date of receipt of such application. CC as per rules. Sd/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-