Order 10

Order Details: COPY OF JUDGMENT
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF MS. PADMA LANDOL,
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, NI ACT DIGITAL COURT- 03, NEW DELHI
DISTRICT, PATIALA HOUSE COURT, NEW DELHI
CC No. 6646-2021
RAHUL RANJAN
R/o 317, Bhagwati Block, Vijayasri Elixir,
Borewell Road, Whitefield,
Bangalore, Karnataka-560066
....Complainant
Versus
RANJEET RANJAN THAKUR
R/o H. No. 66, Deep Enclave-3, Vikas Nagar,
Uttam Nagar, Near Holy Public School,
New Delhi-110059
.....Accused
Date of institution : 10.08.2023 (As per Layers Software)
Offence complained of : 138 NI Act
Date of Decision : 24.02.2023
Plea of guilt : Pleader guilty
Decision : Convicted
JUDGMENT
The present complaint has been filed by the complainant against the accused under section 138
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred as the “Act”).
1. Complainant avers that he shared good relationship with the accused since the year 2018. In
July 2019, accused requested the complainant for a friendly loan of Rs. 3,00,000/- as accused and
his wife need the same to purchase a property. Accused promised that he and his wife would return
the loan amount by January 2020. Accordingly, complainant advanced a loan of Rs. 3,00,000/-
through NEFT transfer in the bank account of accused in three tranche on 24.07.2019 (Re 1/-),
26.07.2019 (Rs. 1,00,000/-) and 30.07.2019 (Rs. 1,99,999/-). In order to show his bonafide, accused
handed over copies of his PAN Card, Aadhar card, passport and like documents. However, despite
CC No. 6646-2021 RAHUL RANJAN Vs RANJEET RANJAN THAKUR Page 1 of 3
-- 1 of 3 --
several extension of time, accused made a only a part payment of Rs. 1,00,000/- through IMPS
transfer in the bank account of complainant. He failed to return the remaining loan of Rs. 2 Lakhs.
Finally, towards the remaining liability, accused handed over a cheque bearing no. 000023 dated
15.02.2021 for Rs. 2,00,000/- (cheque in dispute). Wife of accused also handed over a separate
cheque by way of guarantee bearing no. 000021 dated 11.08.2021 for the same amount i.e. Rs.
2,00,000/-. Upon presentment, the cheque in dispute was returned with the remarks “funds
insufficient” on 17.02.2021. Complaianant then issued legal notice dated 25.08.2021. Despite
service of the notice, no payment was received by the complainant. The accused having failed to
make the payment within the statutory period of 15 days, the present complaint has been filed by
the complainant against the accused.
2. The complainant was directed to submit the original case documents (complaint, affidavit of
pre-summoning evidence, cheque and annexed documents) with the Court, a condition precedent to
the taking of cognizance of the complaint, as per SOP/Guidelines issued by the SCMSC Hon’ble
High Court of Delhi for functioning of Digital Courts. Pursuant to the said compliance, vide order
dated 09.03.2022, after being satisfied that prima facie ingredients of Section 138 NI Act are made
out cognizance was taken and summons were directed to be issued against the accused. Accused
entered into appearance on 01.09.2022 and was admitted to bail on the same date. Upon seeing the
possibility of settlement, matter was referred to the mediation, however, it failed.
3. Thereafter, notice u/s. 251 Cr.PC was framed against the accused on 23.02.2023 and the
accused pleaded guilty. The Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in
plethora of judgments have held that chapter XVII of NI Act containing section 138 to 142 was
introduced with the aim of inculcating confidence in the efficacy of banking operations and giving
credibility to the negotiable instruments employed in business transactions.
4. In the present case, notice has been framed separately in detail to which he pleaded guilty
and stated that he had taken a loan of Rs. 3,00,000/- from the complainant. That he has already
returned Rs. 1,00,000/- to the complainant through bank transfer and now requires 6 months’ time
to pay the cheque amount i.e. Rs. 2,00,000/-. Repercursions of pleading guilty was also explained to
him, however, he continued to plead guity despite the same.
5. Even after pleading guilty, complainant stated that he is willing to give 2 months’ time to
accused to pay the cheque amount with litigation expenses, however, same was not agreeable to the
CC No. 6646-2021 RAHUL RANJAN Vs RANJEET RANJAN THAKUR Page 2 of 3
-- 2 of 3 --
accused and he expressed his inability to pay in 2 months. Hence, the plea of guilt is accepted and
the accused is convicted u/s. 138 NI Act.
6. The accused Ranjeet Ranjan Thakur is convicted for the present offence under section 138
of the Act.
Announced in the open court today on 24.02.2023.
(PADMA LANDOL)
MM (NI Act) Digital Court-03
New Delhi, PHC/Delhi/24.02.2023
It is certified that this judgment contains 3 pages and each page bears my signature.
(PADMA LANDOL)
MM (NI Act) Digital Court-03
New Delhi, PHC/Delhi/24.02.2023
CC No. 6646-2021 RAHUL RANJAN Vs RANJEET RANJAN THAKUR Page 3 of 3
-- 3 of 3 --