Heloo

TRUE TYPE COPY
IN THE COURT OF CHIEF METROPOLITIAN MAGISTRATE SOUTH

EAST DISTRICT ,SAKET COURT ,DELHI
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT NO ----/2017
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Smt Suman
W/O Ravi
R/O A-359 ,Phase-11
Gautam Puri,
Badarpur,
New Delhi-110044 …………Complainant
Versus
Smt.Radha
W/O Sh Kishan
R/O 914, Gautam Puri Phase-1
Badarpur
New Delhi -110044 ………..Accused
P.S BADARPUR
COMPLAINT U/S 138 OF THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT
Most Respectfully Showeth :-
1. That the Complainant is a law abiding citizen and is living along with her
family at the above said address.
2. That the Complainant being known to the Accused through a common
acquaintance, approached the Complainant and informed that the minor child
of the Accused is mentally unstable since birth and requested the Complainant
in the month of February, 2017 for a friendly loan, in order to meet out the
medical expenses of her child and assured that the Accused shall return the
said friendly loan to the Complainant within a period of 7-8 months.
3. That on continuous requests and persuasions of the Accused, and keeping in

view the medical condition of Son of the Accused, the complainant arranged
the amount and advanced the Accused a interest free friendly loan of Rs.
1,90,000/- on or about March, 2017. It is pertinent to state that the said amount
was paid to the Accused on the specific assurances that the Accused will repay
the same within the assured period.
4. That as per commitments and assurances Accused, the Accused was supposed
to repay the interest free loan amount to the Complainant by However, despite
lapse of the September-October, 2017, aforesaid period the Accused did not
repay the amount of the Complainant. The Complainant continuously
approached the Accused to get back the money advanced by her.
5. That for one reason or another the Accused prolonged the issue by giving
excuses and did not make any payment to the Complainant against the friendly
loan availed by the Accused.
6. That when all efforts of the Complainant turned to be strictly warned the
Accused futile, the Complainant strictly that she will take legal action against
the Accused for recovery of the money, At this the Accused tendered her
apologies and asked the Complainant that the Accused is ready to make the
payment by way of cheques.
7. That accordingly, in due discharge of the legal liability towards the

Complainant to repay the friendly loan availed by the Accused, the Accused
issued cheques bearing No. 000008, 000009, 000013, 0000014, 000017 all
dated 05.10.2017 for a sum of Rs. 1,90,000/- drawn on HDFC BANK LTD,
OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA and assured that the cheques will be duly
encashed on their presentation.
8. That believing the representations of the Accused to be true and correct, the
Complainant accepted the said cheques, and on the instructions of the
Accused presented the cheques for encashment with its Bank i.e. HDFÇ
BANK, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi- 110020 but to the utter surprise
and shock of the Complainant the same were r returned by banker of the
accused with a remark PAYMENT STOPPED" vide Return Memos dated
01.11.2017 and the intimation was lastly received by the Complainant,
through her banker on 01. 11.2017
9. That it is pertinent to mention here that after the returning of the cheqụes in
the aforesaid manner. Whenever the Complainant tried to Accused, the
Accused was quite evasive and even failed to answering anything, regarding
the payment of the due amount This type of conduct on part of the Accused,
clearly reflects, that since the beginning of the Accused intentions, were
deceitful and malafide, and the date on which she issued the said cheques, the
accuscd were very well knew that it will not be honoured.
10. That the aforesaid act on part of the Accused clearly speaks out one thing i.e.
the Accused had malafide intentions to cheat the Complainant and as such
never bothered to make the payment and consequently stop the payment of
the cheques, with a view to avoid the liability of the cheques, as such has
caused wrongful gain to himself and loss to the Complainant on the basis of
inducement in order to pay the amount duly received by him.
11. That thereafter the Complainant got issued a legal notice through his counsel
dated 13.11.2017 sent on 14.11.2017 by Speed Post. It is pertinent to state that
the said Legal Notice has been duly served upon the Accused as the Accụsed
is residing at the very same address.
12. That despite receipt of the notice, the Accused has failed to make the payment
of the dishonoured cheques within the stipulated period of time and in thís
manner the Accused has attracted the provisions of section 138 of the
Negotiable Instrument Act, 1981 as amended up to date.
13. That as such the Accused also committed the offence U/s 138 under the N.I.
Act for not honoring the cheques, issued in due discharge of the part liability,
where the penalty can be double the amount of the cheques, besides
imprisonment for two years.
14. That this Court has the territorial jurisdiction to try the present case as the
cheques are drawn on a bank at HDFC BANK, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL
AREA.NEW DELHI within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court. Hence this
Hon'ble Court has necessary jurisdiction to try, summon and punish the
accused.
15. That proper court fees has been affixed on the complaint.
16. That the complaint is being filed within the stipulated period.
PRAYER
it is therefore, respectfully prayed that the Hon’ble court be pleased to
summon try and punish the accused in terms of section 138 of the NI Act it
is further prayed that necessary compensation u/s 357 C.R.P.C and U/S 117
of N.I Act and an interest u/s 80 of the N.I act be also directed to be paid to
the complainant in the interest of justice .
COMPLAINANT
THROUGH
NEW DELHI
Dated PUNEET DHAWAN
Legal Aid Advocate
Chamber No 351
Saket Court
New Delhi-110017
(M) 9899141610

Heloo

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Heloo

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Heloo

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TRUE TYPE COPY

IN THE COURT OF CHIEF METROPOLITIAN MAGISTRATE SOUTH

Most Respectfully Showeth :-

3. That on continuous requests and persuasions of the Accused, and keeping in

7. That accordingly, in due discharge of the legal liability towards the

You might also like