IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Criminal Misc. No.14477 -M of 2010 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION : AUGUST 10, 2011 HARBHAJAN KAUR ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS JASWANT SINGH .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. SK Mahajan, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. Bikramjit Arora, Advocate, for the respondent. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) 1 This petition has been filed under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, praying for quashing of Criminal Complaint No.52 dated 15.6.2009 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 138 and 142, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act'), entitled 'Jaswant Singh v. Harbhajan Kaur', pending in the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patti. The petition also challenges order of summoning dated 13.8.2009 (Annexure P-2). 2 The short contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that notice (Annexure P-3), as required under Section 138 of the Act, was issued at the instance of the respondent. The petitioner forthwith replied vide communication dated 6.6.2009 (Annexure P-4) that the petitioner was ready and willing to make the payment. The respondent had been approached with the Criminal Misc. No.14477 -M of 2010 (O&M) 2 money, however, the respondent refused to accept the cheque amount. In such circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that although no offence had been committed, yet the order of summoning (Annexure P-2) has been issued, which is an abuse of process of law and an abuse of process of court. 3 Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that even at this stage, the petitioner is ready and willing to make payment of the cheque amount, which has been brought to the court by way of Banker's cheque No.182055 dated 8.8.2011, in the sum of ` 40,250/-, drawn on Punjab and Sind Bank, Kairon Branch, favouring Jaswant Singh son of Sawran Singh. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the cheque amount was ` 35,500/-. The petitioner has added the interest amount also at the rate of 12% per annum, till the date of filing of the petition. 4 The banker's cheque has been handed over to the learned counsel for the respondent, in Court. 5 Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the petitioner having responded to the notice by way of making offer of the cheque amount, no offence was made out, yet the criminal complaint (Annexure P- 1) was filed in total disregard to the provisions of Section 138 of the Act. Be that as it may, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the summoning order could not have been issued. 6 The cheque amount along with interest having been Criminal Misc. No.14477 -M of 2010 (O&M) 3 paid to the respondent, through his counsel, this petition is allowed. 7 Criminal Complaint (Annexure P-1) and order of summoning (Annexure P-2) are hereby quashed. August 10, 2011 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?