138
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 19 November 2009
This query is : Resolved
*****case no2 :for the same cheque
138 filed for cheque bouncing case by complainant mr x for Rs 3500000/-against the four accuesed given below
he had his bankers cheque bounce receipt which mentioned
1) payment stopped by the drawer
2) Drawers signature incomplete/requires
accused no1: Is the co
accused no2: partner of accused no1
and brother of compainant mr x
(also ex partner of the
accused no1)
accused no3: parner of accused no1 and son
of accused no2
Accused no4: partner of accused no1 and
son of accused no2
*****case no1 :for the same cheque
filled 1st before the 138
As soon as cheque bounced before the action of complainant the accused no 3 file a complaint in the court for forgery of cheque under sec 156(3)against the Mr x which had a duplicate rubber stamp of co and was a 10yrs old stolen blank cheque of the co certified by the bankers of accused no1 that it was a 10yrs old cheque
order was passed against mr x was arrested on cheating and forgery charge. case was going to start cheque was with the I.O. send to the forensic expert
present status:
****case no 1: mr x expired and the case is also finish since the accused is no more
****case no 2: original complainant mr x expired and the case is run by substitute mr y his son
cheque is with the I.O
and application had been filed by Mr y to start the case with secondary evidence xerox of the cheque since I.O. is not sending the cheque to the 138court inspite of several reminder of the court
judgement has to come
please advice
i am accused no 3
i say that this is a false 138case it was a ten yrs old cheque which had been certified by our bankers and it bears false rubber stamp. the cheque had the signature of my father accused no 2 who is also expired
we two brother and partner accused no 3 and 4 had not issued any cheque nor my father and the cheque does not bear our signature
the details of the case is also given below please give advice how do i get out of this cheque
Adinath@Avinash Patil
(Expert) 19 November 2009
N.I.ACT SECTION 138 DOES NOT ATTRACT HENCE NO CASE MADE OUT
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 20 November 2009
thank you very much for the reply
sir,
But how come the case is still in 138 court. latest is the judge has rejected the application of secondary eveidence and a fresh notice is issued to the police station to send the disputed chequed to the court so that the trail begin
IF NO CASE MADE OUT THAN OUT HOW DO I COME OUT OF THIS MESS CAN I FILLED THE DISCHARGE APPLICATION ON WHICH GROUND DO U HAVE ANY JUDGEMENT
PLEASE HELP ME OUT
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 21 November 2009
IF NO CASE MADE OUT THAN OUT HOW DO I COME OUT OF THIS MESS CAN I FILLED THE DISCHARGE APPLICATION ON WHICH GROUND
DO U HAVE ANY JUDGEMENT
PLEASE HELP ME OUT
once again I m sending complete details of the matter
*****Mr x was a partner in co at the time of his retirement dispute arised and they settle the matter with the panch(Freinds). panch made the settlement on plain paper with all signatory to settle the amount for Rs 5000000 to be paid to mr x for retirement in 3months period
After some 45 days accordingly in front of the panch and their legal advocate the dispute was settle and transaction was settle mr x sign the deed of retirement on stamp paper made by their legal advocate in which it was was clearly mentioned that full and final settlement and nothing is due to mr x at the time of his retirementand the last amount of settlement rs 300000/- given in cheque to mr x for which he provided the receipt and 2more partner enter the company accused no 3 and 4
*** 1)Mr X had 10yrs old Blank cheque of accused no1 with single signature of accused no2 his brother which he had stolen when he was a partner of accused no1
*** 2)accused no1 co since its incorporation had signature of any two partners in bank for transaction
Mr. X used this old blank and stolen cheque of company bearing single signature of accused no2 filled the cheque for rs 3500000 and put the duplicate rubber stamp of accused no1 and deposited in the bank to made a false 138 case
As soon as cheque bounced before the action of complainant the accused no 3 file a complaint (case no 1) in the court for forgery of cheque under sec 156(3) against Mr x which put a duplicate rubber stamp of co and was a 10yrs old stolen blank cheque bearing single signature of accused no 2, certified by the bankers of accused no 1 that it was a 10 yrs old cheque. Order was passed against mr x and was arrested he tried to get the bail in session but was rejected on the ground since he was the ex partner of the company he was knowing the company bank trasaction norms than why did he accept the single signature sign than Mr x went for quashing the matter in high court but was rejected but got the bail from high court
*****case no2: for the same cheque
138 filed for cheque bouncing case by complainant mr x for Rs 3500000/-against the four accused given below:
He had his banker’s cheque bounce receipt which mentioned
1) Payment stopped by the drawer
2) Drawers signature incomplete/requires
Accused no1: Is the co
Accused no2: partner of accused no1
and brother of complainant mr x
(also ex partner of the
accused no1)
Accused no3: partner of accused no1 and son
Of accused no2
Accused no4: partner of accused no1 and
Son of accused no2
Present status of the matter :
****case no 1: mr x expired and the forgery case is also finish since the accused is no more
****case no 2: original complainant mr x expired and the case is run by substitute mr y his son
Cheque is with the I.O
and application had been filed by Mr y to start the case with secondary evidence Xerox of the cheque since I.O. is not sending the cheque to the 138court inspite of several reminder of the court
