Threat for extradition-cheque bounce (personal loan)

To end the interesting legal controversy I  need to enter in this conversation to high light some points which I OBSERVED FROM THE BEGINING in this query. Those are namely,-

1. The querrist took loan sometimes in the year 2007 and paid all of his EMI up to 2011 regularly which ought to be admitted by the Bank.

2. The Bank must admit the facts that they took Post dated cheques from the borrower  as EMI in 2007 at the time of granting loan and also admit the fact that they took collateral security also.

3. From the query it transpires that the Bank knows the phone no. of the querist because THE QUERIST CLAIMED THAT "......About a week back I RECEIVED A CALL FROM BANK PERSON which means that the Bank knows the phone no. of the Borrower.

NOW MY QUESTION IS :-

1. How the borrower could presuppose it at the time of issuing post dated cheques  that after  a lapse of 5 or 6 years said post dated cheque issued some times in 2007 will be returned on some grounds ?

2. When the Banker knows the phone number of the borrower why they did not inform the incident of return of the cheque issued by  the Borrower ? Why the Banker informed the Borrower after filing the criminal case ?

3. When the BANKER TOOK COLATERAL SECURITY  AGAINST LOAN how the BANKER can rush to the court against the Borrower and file a criminal case against him abruptly.

4. When the application of the Bank was signed and verified by a clerk/officer of the Bank why its reply cannot be submitted and verified by the constituted attorney of the alleged accused?

These are the points of law to be raised before the case for proper adjudication and to ascertain whether the criminal case filed by the BANK AGAINST BORROWER IS MAINTAINABLE OR NOT.

My point..

EMI cheque ideally should not fall in the category of S.138, because the Bank certainly has the collateral security with them, but as of now this is how the law stands interpreted.

Your point

3. When the BANKER TOOK COLATERAL SECURITY  AGAINST LOAN how the BANKER can rush to the court against the Borrower and file a criminal case against him abruptly.

Then why courts cannot ask bank before taking complaint this question ????

Courts are totally off the law in this matter !!

THANK YOU LEARNED Mr.TRIVEDI.  I appreciate your intelligence.  Look at  the present Judiciary and its injudicious acts. 

DEAR MR. TRIVIDI 

                               PLEASE BEAR WITH ME FOR TYPING IN CAPITAL LETTERS. EVEN MAILS I TYPE IN CAPITAL LETTERS ONLY . I HAD ALREADY UNDERGONE MICRO INCISION CATARACT SURGERY FOR BOTH MY EYES IN THE SAME WEEK , ONE ON 14TH AND THE OTHER ON 19TH MAY 2012 WITH FOLDABLE LENS IMPLANTED . IN ADDITION TO THAT I AM WEARING BIFOCAL LENS FOR MORE THAN 35 YEARS . SO FOR READING WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN , I AM TYPING IN CAPITAL LETTERS . EVEN THEN NOW I FOUND THAT SOME SENTENCES ARE INCOMPLETE . I HAVE ALREADY EXPLAINED THIS IN THIS FORUM TO SOMEBODY ELSE .

                       NOW IN YOUR REPLY YOU HAVE STATED THAT IF THE COMPLAINANT PROVES THE DEBT AND THE ACCUSED ADMITS IT , THEN THE CASE IS OVER AND IT ATTRACTS SECTION 8 AND 139 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT AND THE ACCUSED MUST REBUT IT. MY QUESTION IS IF THIS IS ACCEPTED THEN HOW THE MADRAS HIGH COURT HAD ALLOWED THE APPEAL BY THE ACCUSED IN A CHECK RETURN CASE WHICH I STATE HERE UNDER : IT WAS A BUSINESS TRANSACTION . TWO PERSONS WERE IN THE BUSINESS IN 2004. ONE WANTED TO GET OUT OF THAT BUSINESS . BUT THE OTHER PERSON DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH MONEY AT THAT TIME TO GIVE HIS SHARE . SO THEY ENTERED INTO A AGREEMENT THAT AFTER 4 YEARS HE WILL PAY THAT AMOUNT TO HIM AND ALSO ISSUED A CHECK WITHOUT A DATE BECAUSE IT IS ONLY AFTER 4 YEARS .THE ACCUSED ADMITTED THE AGREEMENT AND ALSO THE CHECK . BUT THE HIGH COURT CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT EVEN IF THE ACCUSED ADMITTED THE AGREEMENT AND THE CHECK , SINCE THE CHECK WAS PRESENTED AFTER A PERIOD OF 4 YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE AGREEMENT , THE DEBT IS NOT A LEGALLY VALID DEBT AND IT IS A TIME BARRED ONE . THEREFORE IT DOES NOT FALL UNDER SECTION 138 AND THE APPEAL WAS ALLOWED . THE ACCUSED WON THE CASE . THE HIGH COURT JUDGE WHO DELIVERED THIS JUDGEMENT IS A VERY INTELLIGENT PERSON EVEN WHEN HE WAS THE DISTRICT JUDGE. AS A DEFENDANT WE HAVE WON 2 CASES WHEN HE WAS THE DISTRICT JUDGE . ONE THE FIRST APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE PLAINTIFF AND THE SECOND THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY ME .APPEAL WAS DISMISSED AND THE CROSS OBJECTION WAS ALLOWED . NOW THAT PERSON HAD COME FOR THE SECOND APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT WHERE THE SAME JUDGE IS ELEVATED TO THE HIGH COURT . WE DID NOT CONTEST THE DELAY PETITION FILED BY HIM . BUT STAY WAS NOT GRANTED AND THE IMPLEADING PETITION WAS DISMISSED . IT IS PENDING FROM 2007 .

       THE NEXT MATTER YOU HAVE RAISED IS BANK CANNOT PROCEED WHEN THEY HAVE THE  COLATERAL SECURITY WITH THEM .  BANK CAN PROCEED IN BOTH WAYS CIVIL AS WELL AS CRIMINAL TO RECOVER THE LOAN . THIS IS PERMITTED AS PER THE BANKING PROCEDURES .

      NEXT FOR MR. ROY'S QUESTION , AT NO POINT OF TIME THE BANK WILL ADMIT THAT THEY HAVE TAKEN POST DATED CHECKS FROM THE BORROWER . ONLY THE BORROWER HAD TO PROVE THAT THE CHECKS WERE ISSUED IN 2007 WITH ONLY HIS SIGNATURE OR HE HAD FILLED UP EVERYTHING AND GAVE IT . THIS HE CAN PROVE ONLY BY SENDING THE CHECK TO THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT LABORATORY TO FIND OUT THE AGE OF THE INK ON THE CHECK . ONLY THE HIGH COURT WILL ALLOW SUCH A PETITION . NEXT QUESTION IS WHY THE BANK HAD NOT INFORMED THE BORROWER EARLIER AND AFTER FILING THE CRIMINAL CASE , THEY ARE INFORMING HIM . THE BANK'S DUTY IS TO INFORM THE BORROWER'S LAST KNOWN ADDRESS ONLY ABOUT HIS LIABILITY AND THEY WILL PROCEED CIVIL AS WELL AS CRIMINAL ACTION AGAINST HIM  . THE BORROWER SHOULD HAVE UPDATED HIS ADDRESS TO THAT OF HIS PUNE ADDRESS . THIS IS THE MISTAKE OF THE BORROWER . NOW THE BORROWER CANNOT TAKE THE ADVANTAGE OF PROVING THAT THE CHECK WAS ISSUED IN 2007. HE HAD ALREADY ADMITTED IN HIS MAILS HIS LIABILITY AND THAT IS A VALID ONE FOR ANOTHER 27 MONTHS . NO OTHER DOCUMENT IS NECESSARY . EVEN A SINGLE PAYMENT IS MADE THE DOCUMENT IS VALID FOR 27 MONTHS FROM THAT DATE . IF A LETTER IS GIVEN ACKNOWLEDGING THE DEBT THAT IS ENOUGH FOR ANOTHER 27 MONTHS . HE HAD DONE EVERYTHING AS PER THE BANK'S PROCEDURES AND NOW HE IS COMING TO THIS FORUM .  -JOSEPH WILFRED - 13/02/2014 AT 19:37 HRS       

Dear Learned Members,

I have been reading the replies and happened to speak with banker. Let me clarify something here. Bank had not taken any collateral security (other than checks) at the time of signing the loan agreement.

Based on my recent phone conversation with him, he is no longer talking about "case" but has started saying:

1. We will send a letter to US embassy about the loan which might create problems in your green card.

2. We will inform your employer in US about the case.

Now, question is if I am unable to pay and he goes to embassy/employer can they simply cancel the visa and ask me to return to India?

Its true, how you can stop him to do some thing against you? In fact you had taken loan amount from that bank and you were involved with financial dealing with him. No doubt legally you are sound as you face the trial of section 138 but such type of side effects are the part of your issue which you can't avoid.

Better you face the trial and come out of it.

DEAR MR. CHAITANYA AGASHE 

                                                       I KNOW THAT THERE IS NO COLLATERAL SECURITY FOR YOUR LOAN . BUT WHEN OTHER MEMBERS ARE TAKING THAT LINE I HAVE TELL THEM THAT THE BANK HAS THE OPTION OF TAKING BOTH CIVIL AND CRIMINAL ACTION . REGARDING WHAT THEY HAVE STATED NOW , THEY CANNOT GO TO THE UNITED STATES EMBASSY OR TAKE IT UP WITH YOUR EMPLOYER IN THE STATES . THE EMBASSY OF A COUNTRY IS THERE IN ANOTHER COUNTRY ONLY TO TAKE UP THE DIPLOMATIC CHANNELS AS ADVISED BY HIS COUNTRY AND THAT THE COUNTRY IN WHICH HE IS THERE WANTED TO COMMUNICATE ANY MATTER TO THAT COUNTRY WILL COMMUNICATE THROUGH THE EMBASSY . ABOVE ALL FOR PROCESSING VISA APPLICATIONS . THEIR DUTY IS ALSO TO PROTECT THEIR OWN CITIZENS LIVING IN THIS COUNTRY . THEY WILL NOT TAKE UP BANK LOANS AND ALL . IN SUCH CASES THE BANK HAD TO OBTAIN A COURT ORDER AND APPROACH THE MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS IN INDIA TO TAKE UP THE MATTER WITH THE EMBASSY . EVEN MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS WILL BE HAVING MANY MATTERS . 

      BUT YOUR ARE THERE IN A H1B EMPLOYER VISA . THE BANK CAN TAKE UP THE MATTER WITH YOUR EMPLOYER . IN SUCH A CASE YOUR EMPLOYER WILL DEFINITELY RECALL YOU TO AVOID UNPLEASANT THINGS . HE WILL NOT ALLOW HIS NAME TO BE SPOILED BECAUSE OF YOU . THE NEXT THING THE BANK CAN APPROACH THE HIGH COURT FOR A DIRECTION TO SUMMON YOU TO APPEAR FOR THIS CASE . IN SUCH AN EVENT THE HIGH COURT WILL DEFINITELY ISSUE SUMMONS TO YOU . IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO AVOID SUCH SUMMONS . THE NEXT THING THEY CAN DO IS TO APPROACH THE HIGH COURT TO " SUSPEND " YOUR PASSPORT AS THERE IS A CRIMINAL CASE PENDING AGAINST YOU IN INDIA . WHILE APPLYING FOR A PASSPORT YOUR ARE FILLING UP A COLUMN " NO CRIMINAL CASE IS PENDING HERE " . SO WHEN A CRIMINAL CASE IS PENDING NOW , THEY CAN VERY WELL APPROACH THE HIGH COURT FOR SUSPENDING YOUR PASSPORT . BECAUSE AFTER ISSUING A PASSPORT FOR ANY CORRECTION / ALTERATION THE PASSPORT AUTHORITIES WILL ACT ONLY ON THE BASIS OF A HIGH COURT ORDER . IF YOUR PASSPORT IS SUSPENDED , THIS WILL BE COMMUNICATED TO THE EMBASSY HERE BY THE PASSPORT AUTHORITIES WHO IN TURN WILL PASS ON THE SAME TO THEIR COUNTRY AND YOU WILL BE DETAINED THERE AND DEPORTED TO INDIA AS IF YOU HAVE GONE THERE WITHOUT A TRAVEL DOCUMENT .

        AVOID ALL THIS . IF YOU ARE IN INDIA MY SUGGESTION WILL BE ENTIRELY DIFFERENT - JOSEPH WILFRED - 15/02/2014  AT 12.21 HRS 

AS YOU ADMITTED CATEGORICALLY THAT YOU DID NOT GIVE ANY COLLATERAL SECURITY  THEN YOU HAVE NO CASE. BETTER SURRENDER BEFORE THE BANK FOLLOWING ADVISE OF LEARNED MR. J. WILFRED..

DEAR MR . CHECK VICTIMS LAWYER 

                                                           I TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH THE VIEW OF ADVISING YOUR CLIENT TO FACE THE TRIAL . HAVING KNOWN THE CONDITIONS OF GETTING A PASSPORT AND STAYING ABROAD ON THE BASIS OF THAT PASSPORT IS IT ADVISABLE TO HAVE A CRIMINAL CASE ON HIM IN INDIA ? . THE NEXT DANGEROUS ONE IS THAT HE IS ON A EMPLOYER VISA . THAT VISA BELONGS TO THE EMPLOYER WHO WILL SEND ANYBODY TO THAT COUNTRY . THAT IS H1B VISA . PASSPORT IS FOR GOING OUT OF INDIA . IF YOU HAVE A CRIMINAL CASE ON YOU PENDING IN INDIA THEN EVEN IF YOU APPLY FOR A PASSPORT YOU WILL NOT GET IT . . HE SHOULD SEE TO THAT THE CRIMINAL CASE IS CLOSED AT THE EARLIEST . THAT IS THE REASON WHY THE BANK IS NOT DISCUSSING ABOUT HIS CRIMINAL CASE AT ALL . ACTUALLY A DAGGER IS HANGING OVER HIS HEAD OR A NOOSE IS PUT AROUND HIS NECK BY THE BANK . ANYTIME THEY CAN PULL THE TRIGGER . THIS IS MY LAST ADVICE . EITHER YOU TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT . THE CHOICE IS YOURS - JOSEPH WILFRED - 15/02/2014 AT 23:18 HRS 

Please tell us how  and when the court summons were served on you.

If you are ready to pay and need some time please indicate what time frame is needed.

There will be no of steps in the case so that  you can get sufficient time for details please show us all the case documents.

This is summons case so need not worry much . The complainant is interested to get its money back that is why threatening tactics.

ONCE YOU ARE REPRESENTED IN THE CASE AND PROPER LEGAL STEPS ARE TAKEN THE CASE WILL GO ON AND MEANWHILE YOU CAN ARRANGE PAYMENTS. THREATS OF INFORMING TO THIS AND THAT WILL ALSO VANISH.

DEAR MR. SANTOSH SINGH

                                                 I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW YOU ARE GIVING ASSURANCE TO THE PERSON ABROAD ON WHOM A CRIMINAL CASE IS FILED BY A BANK FOR RECOVERING THE LOAN AMOUNT ON THE BASIS OF THE EQUATED MONTHLY INSTALMENT CHECK ISSUED BY HIM . THE BANK IS HOLDING SOME MORE CHECKS ALSO . WHEN THE CONDITION FOR APPLYING FOR A PASSPORT IS THAT "NO CRIMINAL CASE SHOULD BE PENDING AGAINST HIM IN ANY COURT IN INDIA "  , THEN HOW CAN YOU GIVE ASSURANCE ON BEHALF OF THE BANK THAT WE CAN CONDUCT THE CASE AND SIMULTANEOUSLY PAY THE AMOUNTS TO THE BANK . THIS WILL APPLY ONLY TO A PERSON IF HE IS IN INDIA . BUT BANK CANNOT CONTACT THE EMBASSY AND ALL FOR THIS . TODAY YOU MUST HAVE READ IN THE NEWS PAPERS THAT THE UNITED STATES AMBASSADOR IN INDIA HAD MET THE HONORABLE GUJARAT CHIEF MINISTER AT GANDHI NAGAR IN GUJARAT . EVEN FOR THAT HE MET HIM ONLY AFTER INFORMING THE EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTRY OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA . SO THE BANK CANNOT APPROACH THE EMBASSY OFFICIALS EITHER IN INDIA OR DIRECTLY CONTACT THEM IN THE STATES . -JOSEPH WILFRED - 16/02/2014 AT 19.35 HRS  

By filing a criminal case against any body does not mean he or she is criminal.

There is due process of law and only after completion of that process if a person is declared guilty than only he or she is criminal.

Till that time all threats by complainant are illegal. And this is a summons case  not a serious criminal case. So even threats of complainant  prior to conviction can invite counter action .

IMMEDIETLY YOU LODGE A COMPLAINT AGAINST YOUR BANKER IN THE OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE OF YOUR DISTRICT  ALLEGING THAT OVER PHONE YOUR BANKER IS INTIMIDATING AND ALARMING YOU CONTINUOUSLY SAYING THAT UNLESS YOU LIQUIDATE YOUR PERSONAL LOAN TAKEN FROM THE BANK THEY WILL TAKE STEPS TO CANCEL YOUR VISA AND SHALL REPORT IT TO MY EMPLOYER AT USA TAKING THE MATTER WITH THE CONSUL GENERAL OF USA AND TO RUIN MY FUTURE AND FURTHER FILE A WRIT APPLICATION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA  BEFORE THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT FOR NECESSARY RELIEF AND REDRESS. FOR FILING WRIT CASE A COMPETENT SENIOR COUNSEL IS NEEDED WHO HAS VAST KNOWLEDGE IN CONSTITUTIONAL RELIEF.

Immediately you may contact me for successful guidance to win over the case with legal tricks by return mail if you so desire.  My mail ID is,- bnroy.advocate@gmail.com B.N. ROY, Senior Advocat

                                                                                                                      Mobile- 09836858000

No need to use a gun or cannon for attack on an insect.

Get a local lawyer and arrange to appear in the case. Moment the steps are taken in the case all other nonsense will stop.