HRITHIK SHARMA Advocate

Punjab and Haryana High Court      

                                                                              (M) 98158-60606
 
Office: Chamber Number 169, New Courts, Jalandhar.

  (Registered)
                     
To                                                                                               Date: 11.06.2019
                  Mr. Manmohan,
               

Subject:- Legal Notice under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act.

Sir,

I have  been directed by my client, Mr. Jagmeet, Jalandhar, to serve you with the following
legal notice:-

1. That you were in good terms with my client and you approached my client for
financial assistance and took financial assistance of Rs.70,000/- (Rupees  Seventy
Thousand only) from my client and assured my client to repay the same. My client
approached you number of times and asked you to return the said amount.

2. That in order to discharge the legally enforceable debt against you i.e. in order to clear
the payment of legally enforceable debt, you issued a cheque in favour of my client.
Reference is made to the cheque bearing no.418844 dated 30.09.2007 amounting of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) drawn on ICICI bank, Distt. Jalandhar, and
cheque bearing no.248015 dated 28.01.2008 amounting Rs.20,000/- drawn on HDFC
Bank, Distt. Jalandhar

3. That at the time of issuance of the cheque in question, you gave an assurance to my
client that the cheque in question is good for value and the same shall be encashed
when it is presented.

4. That as per your assurance, my client presented the cheque in question with his
banker for encashment, but to the utmost surprise of my client the cheque in question
was returned unpaid, with the remarks “STOP PAYMENT”. The intimation regarding
the dishonouring of the cheque in question was received by my client vide memo
dated 29.01.2008. 

5. That you are liable to pay the amount of the cheque in question. The cheque in
question was issued against the legally enforceable debt.

Now I do hereby means of this notice call upon you to make the payment of the cheques in question
i.e. cheque bearing no.418844 dated 30.09.2007 amounting of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees  Fifty
Thousand only) to my client and cheque bearing no.248015 dated 28.01.2008 amounting
Rs.20,000/-,(Rupees  Twenty Thousand only) within 15 days from the receipt of this notice,
failing which I have got clear instructions from my client to take an appropriate legal action
against you and in that event you will be burdened with all incidental charges.

Copy kept for record and further action.   

                                      (HRITHIK SHARMA)

                     Advocate
IN THE COURT OF CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE: SUS
NAGAR, JALANDHAR
Crl. Complaint No. 758 of 2008
In the matter of:-
Shri Jagmeet,
.......C
omplainant
Versus
Shri Manmohan,
……….....Accused

CRIMINAL COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 138/142 OF THE

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 (AS AMENDED UP TO
DATE)
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-
1. That the complainant is a law abiding and peace loving citizen of India

2. That there is good friendly term between the family of the accused and the
complainant since a long time.

3. That on 28.5.2007, the accused had approached the complainant and apprised him that
he is in some financial crises and sought the financial assistance from the complainant
to the tune of Rs.70,000/- (Rupees seventy thousand only) and by considering the past
relations with the accused and his family, the complainant adhered said request of the
accused and given a sum of Rs.50,000 through bank transfer and Rs.20,000/- in cash
on 28.5.2007.In presence of Mr. Vinod Shukla, While taking the said friendly loan
from the complainant, the accused had assured and promised to re-pay the said loan
amount to the complainant shortly.

4. That later on, in order to discharge the said loan liability, the accused had signed,
issued and handed over a cheque no. 418844, dated 30.09.2007 of Rs.50,000/-,from
his account no. 008201526101 drawn on ICICI Bank Jalandhar opp. Kings Hotel,
Jalandhar and cheque no. 248015 dated 28.1.2008 of Rs.20,000/- in favour of the
complainant and while handing over the said cheque, the accused had assured that the
said cheque is good for payment and would be honoured on presentation
5. That believing the assurance of the accused as true, the complainant presented the said
cheque for encashment through her banker Punjab National Bank., SUS Nagar,
Jalandhar, after its due date, but it was to the utter shock and surprise to the
complainant that the said cheque returned by your banker with the remarks “STOP
PAYMENT” and this fact has been communicated to the complainant by his banker
vide Return Memo dated 29.01.2008

6. The said legal notice has been served upon the accused, but despite the service of the
same, the accused did not bother to reply or comply with the terms of the said legal
notice, till date.

7. That now the accused has illegally retained the legitimate sum of the complainant for
his wrongful gain and for the wrongful loss to the complainant and even, the cheque,
which the accused has issued in favour of the complainant, in order to discharge his
said liability got dishonoured and the accused was well aware about the status of his
account, but despite having knowledge of the same, the accused issued the said
cheque in favour of the complainant to cheat and defraud the same, as such, the
accused has committed the offences punishable under Section 138/142 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (As amended up to date), for which he is liable to
be prosecuted and punished according to law

8. That the parties to the complaint reside and work for gain at Jalandhar. The banker of
the complainant situates at S.U.S Nagar, within the jurisdiction of Jalandhar, hence
this Hon’ble Court has got the jurisdiction to try and decide the present complaint

9. That the present complaint is being filed within the stipulated period of limitation.

10. Despite service of notice, the accused has not taken any steps to liquidate his liability
and has failed to make balance payments to the complainant towards the amount
covered under the said cheque, within the statutory period of 15 days or thereafter.
Thus, the Accused has, therefore committed an offence within the meaning of Section
138 and other sections of the amended provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act,
1881, for which he is liable to be prosecuted and punished.

11. That a list of documents are annexed with this complaint.

PRAYER:-

a. Summon, prosecute and punish the Accused and also direct the accused to pay the
amount as double to the amount covered under the said dishonored cheques, under the
provisions of Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act,1881 as amended by the Negotiable Instrument laws (Amended and
Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2002. In accordance with Section 357 of Code of
Criminal Procedure 1974, out of the penalty imposed, the Accused be ordered to
 compensate the Complainant to the extent of Rs.140,000 /- (Rupees One Lakh Fourty
Thousand Only) and

b. Such other and further orders may be passed as may be deemed fit and proper by this
Hon'ble Court.

It is prayed accordingly.

Place: Jalandhar

Complainant

Through Counsel

(HRITHIK SHARMA)

ADVOCATE
 In the Court of Sessions Judge, Jalandhar

Manmohan
..Petitioner
..VERSUS..
State of Punjab
..Respondent

Subject:- FIRST BAIL PETITION UNDER SECTION 438

Cr.P.C. – Directing the arresting officer, investigating
officer, SHO of concerned police station to release the
petitioner on bail in the above noted case in the event of
his arrest.

Sir,
The petitioner respectfully submits as under:

1.  That the complainant filed a Criminal complaint under Section 138 of the
negotiable instrument act,1881 against the petitioner regarding bounced cheques
amount to Rs70,000/- in the court of CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE:
SUS NAGAR, JALANDHAR and due to absence of the applicant the Hon’ble Trial
court passed an order and declared the petitioner proclaimed offender under section
82 of code of criminal procedure and also passed an order for attachment under
Section 83 of code of criminal procedure

2. That on the wrong complaint filed by the complainant, the learned trial court of
CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE: SUS NAGAR, JALANDHAR declared
the applicant/petitioner proclaimed offender and the police wants to arrest the
petitioner. The applicant/petitioner is entitled for anticipatory bail on the following
grounds:-
 a. That the applicant came to know about the above noted case/complaint through a
friend who told the applicant that a police official came and told about the case but no
notice or warrant was served. The applicant petitioner immediately engaged counsel
and came to know about the above-mentioned complaint and proceedings.

b. That the proceedings for declare the applicant/petitioner proclaimed offender are
illegal and defective as no notice was ever served on the applicant/petitioner nor any
notice was pasted neither any person contacted the applicant/petitioner regarding the
complaint or orders of the learned trial court.

c. That the absence of the applicant/petitioner was not intentional or malafide but due
to lack of knowledge of the case/complaint or order
d. That there is no apprehension for absconding or evading of taking trial.
e. That the applicant/petitioner is well reputed and well educated and prestige of the
applicant/petitioner will be reduced in the society if he is arrested.
f.  That the applicant/petitioner undertakes for not to leave India without the prior
permission and consent of the Hon’ble court or the trial court.
g. That the applicant/petitioner undertakes to abide by all the terms and conditions as
imposed by the Hon’ble court in the event of bail.
h. That the applicant/petitioner undertakes for not to hamper the bail and ready to
furnish the bail bonds of sound amount for the satisfaction of the Hon’ble court.
i. That in such type of false cases the bail is rule and refusal of the bail will not serve
any purpose.

PRAYER.

It is therefore prayed that the bail petition may kindly be accepted, the petitioner may kindly
be granted anticipatory bail, the directions may kindly be given to the arresting officer,
investigating officer, SHO of concerned police station to release the petitioner on bail in the
event of his arrest. In the meantime, till the final decision of the case the arrest of the
petitioner may kindly be stayed in the interest of justice.
It is further prayed that interim bail may also kindly be granted to the applicant/petitioner till
the final disposal of the application.

Petitioner
Through
 Counsel
Place: Jalandhar

IN THE COURT OF CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE: SUS

NAGAR, JALANDHAR

IN THE MATTER OF :
JAGMEET
…….COMPLAINANT
VS.
MANMOHAN
…….ACCUSED

APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM PERSONAL APPERANCE

OF ACCUSED

Most Respectfully Showeth:

1. That the captioned matter is pending for adjudication in the Hon’ble Court and is fixed for
today for framing of notice

2. Mother-in-law of the accused and is of old age and is currently residing at Dehradun and
is suffering from cancer and she’s been admitted to an ICU in Max Hospital, Dehradun and
accordingly the accused has to attend her mother and currently she is being treated by Dr.
Arvind Patel of Max Hospital, Dehradun. Photostat copy of Aadhar card proving the age and
certificate issued by concerned doctor is attached.

3. That the applicants shall not misuse the concession of exemption.

4. That the applicants undertake to appear before this Hon’ble court as and when directed

5. That the non appearance of the accused is not deliberate and voluntary.
 Prayer
It is humbly prayed to the Hon’ble court to exempt the accused from personal
appearance on the basis of above mentioned facts and circumstances.

Place : Jalandhar ADVOCATE

IN THE COURT OF CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE: SUS

NAGAR, JALANDHAR

IN THE MATTER OF :
JAGMEET
…….COMPLAINANT
VS.
MANMOHAN
…….ACCUSED

Subject : Application praying for cancellation of warrant Under

SECTION 70(2) OF CR.P.C. FOR CANCELLATION OF Non Bailable
Warrant against the Accused .

Accused named above respectfully submits as follows:

1. That the accused (Manmohan) was absent before this Hon’ble Court on the last occasion as
his mother was admitted in Max Hospital ,Dehradun as she is suffering from cancer and
accused also accompanied her as it was emergency situation and the accused is the only son
to attend on his mother..

2.That this Hon’ble Court was pleased to issue non bailable warrant of arrest against the
accused on the last hearing date.

3.That the absence of the accused was neither intentional nor deliberate and has resulted due
to the aforesaid circumstance. The accused hereby produces a copy of inpatient record of his
son as on that date.
 4.That the accused undertakes not to be absent before Court on any future dates and
undertakes to be punctual in future.

PRAYER:

It is, therefore prayed that this Hon’ble court may be pleased to recall and cancel the warrant
issued against the accused in the interest of justice and equity.

Applicant: Manmohan

Place : Jalandhar  Through Counsel

(HRITHIK SHARMA)

Advocate for Accused

IN THE COURT OF CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE: SUS
NAGAR, JALANDHAR

IN THE MATTER OF :
JAGMEET
…….COMPLAINANT
VS.
MANMOHAN
…….ACCUSED

Subject : Application for compounding the offence pending before this

court.

Sir,

It is respectfully submitted as under :-

1. That the above noted case is pending before this Hon’ble court and the same is fixed for
today.

2. That the complainant made the complaint which were taken into cognisance by
Magistrate.

3. That both the parties have made out of court settlement.

4. That the both the parties have reached settlement on their free will and no coercion has
been used by either parties.
5. That the settlement reached is attached to the application.

PRAYER;

It is therefore respectfully prayed that the application may kindly be accepted, in the interest
of justice.

Applicant

Through counsel

Place : Jalandhar