1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R Sahibditta Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. S.B.CR. MISC. PETITION NO.1077/2006 DATE OF ORDER :: July 03, 2007 PRESENT HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR Mr. N.L.Joshi, for the petitioner. Mr. Pankaj Sharma, for the respondent. Mr.Ashok Upadhyaya, P.P. BY THE COURT: By the instant criminal misc. petition under section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has challenged the order dt. 16.6.2006 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Anupgarh (for short `the revisional court' hereinafter), whereby the revision petition filed by the petitioner against the order dt. 3.6.2005 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Gharsana, Distt. Sriganganagar (for short `the trial court' hereinafter) was dismissed. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Carefully gone through the order of the trial court as well as the revsional court. I have also gone through the reply to the notice by the petitioner through counsel. A complaint has been filed by non-petitioner No.2 against the petitioner 2 for the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (for short `the Act' hereinafter). Prior to the filing of the complaint, a notice demanding the cheque amount was issued to the petitioner, which was replied by the petitioner through his counsel. On perusal of the reply to the notice, in my view, even if there is any register of green colour, it has no relevancy with the matter in issue. Even otherwise, the petitioner came with a vague ground that the non-petitioner No.2 has a green register in which he records the dealings. This fac`t has been denied by the non-petitioner No.2. Be that as it may, even if there is any such register in possession of the non-petitioner No.2, it has absolutely no connectivity with the matter in issue or the controversy raised in the instant case. In the circumstances, therefore, it cannot be said that the order impugned would result in serious miscarriage of justice or abuse of process of Court warranting interference of this Court in inherent jurisdiction. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. [H.R.PANWAR],J. m.asif/-