Dishonour of cheques
DJPoint
(Querist) 22 November 2011
This query is : Resolved
Person A stole three empty cheques from person B's chequebook on 2nd June. Person B came to know of the theft of cheques from his chequebook on 3rd June, and he immediately called his bank and cancelled his whole chequebook. The bank issued stop payment order on all cheques of the chequebook of person B.
Now on 6th June, person A who had stolen cheques called person B to his office and on gun point asked him to fill the 3 cheques with 3 different amounts, and sign them, and also asked him to fill a pronote for the combined amount of 2 cheques, and threatened that if he, person B, told anyone about this incident his family would be harmed. The pronote didn't have any stamps on it.
Since there was a serious threat of grave danger to his family, person B didn't tell anyone about that incident.
Then after two and a half months, person A demanded money in blackmailing to person B, and when person B refused, then person A went to the bank of person B at area C, and presented the cheque and bank attached slip with it giving the reason of "stop payment". Person A then went to his local police station at area C, and got registered FIR for the dishonour of cheque.
Police told person B about the FIR, and he got pre-arrest bail from the Court.
After one month, person A then went to area D, and there opened a new account, and deposited the 2nd stolen cheque, and that bank of area D attached "stop payment" reason in the slip with the cheque. Person A then went to area D police station and got registered 2nd FIR.
Person B then handed himself to area D police who first handed him back to area C police for the investigation of first FIR there, after which he was sent on judicial remand by the area C magistrate. Investigating Officer of area C police submitted in his report that the person B was innocent, and that the Complainant, person A, was unable to prove that he had given the money to person B which was on 1st cheque.
Then police from area D got person B's remand from jail, and the Investigating Officer of that area police also found him innocent as the person A was unable to prove that he had given those amounts which was on the 2nd cheque to the accused person B.
The witnesses presented by the person A against person B told police in both cases that they had not seen person A giving money to person B, the accused. Only the younger brother of person A, the Complainant, told police that he had seen his brother, person A, giving money to person B.
After few months, person B got his first post arrest bail in first case from the court.
Then person A applied for reinvestigation of first case that was registered in area C, giving the reason that Investigating Officer had been biased towards the accused, and that he was working with the accused person B.
A DSP was appointed to re-investigate. The accused was at that time in jail. The accused recorded his statement infront of the assistant of the DSP, and DSP then kept on doing investigation, and recorded statements of person A's younger brother, who, told that he had seen person B, the accused getting money from his brother, person A, the Complainant. The 2nd witness was an office boy of person A, who said that he doesn't know the exact amount but person B used to come and take money from person A.
Based upon these statements and that the signatures on the both cheques were genuine, he declared person B as guilty, and sent supplementary challan in the first case. The DSP had not asked the accused who at that time was in jail to prove his case, nor the DSP asked the Complainant to prove that he had that money before with him that he had given to person B.
Then after one month, in 2nd case that had been registered in area D, the accused, person B, got his post arrest bail from High Court, where the judge during the proceedings remarked that 2nd case was registered due to malafide intention, since two cheques belonged to one transaction, so both cheques should have gone in first FIR, or both FIR's should have been registered in area C.
Both cases are now in trial court for the past 5 months, and no evidence has yet been recorded.
Now please tell me what remedies can accuse now avail? Should he go for acquittal under CrPC, or should he apply for quashing of 2nd FIR, or both FIRs?
What do you suggest he should do? What are his options?
Thanks
ajay sethi
(Expert) 22 November 2011
without going through the complete case papers,report of the police, orders passed by high court it would not be advisable to make any comments
Shonee Kapoor
(Expert) 23 November 2011
Nothing more to add/.
Regards,
Shonee Kapoor
harassed.by.498a@gmail.com
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 23 November 2011
Unless some one intentionally creates a room to right one hardly finds room to comment afer Mr.Sethi has replied.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 24 November 2011
so your comments are also not required prabhakar.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 26 November 2011
you are right makkad, but that was a way to express agreement with opinion.
