Criminal Complaint No.

_________ /2014

IN THE COURT OF HON’BLE ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE AT VADODARA

COMPLAINANT
Mr. Amin Sadruddin Pirani
Residing at : 17, Platinum Society,
Opp. Aayurvedic Collage,
Besides S. T. Depo,
Panigate, Vadodara.

V/s.

ACCUSED
Mr.Satyaprakash Sinh
40, Hari Krushna Park-2,
Opp. Sayaji Park,
Ajwa Road, Vadodara.

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 138 OF

THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881

The present complainant most humbly and respectfully submits

this complaint as under:

1. That the present complainant is resides at the above mentioned

address & doing the business of fishing at Vadodara .

2. That the accused is in a business of VISA and Finance

consultancy under the banner of “Satya Manpower Consultancy”.

That one Mr. Pavan Sahani is very good friend of the complainant

and that Mr. Pavan was wanted to go abroad and for the same the

complainant had helped him.

3. That the accused had received a sum of Rs.91,700/- from the

complainant for the purpose of visa and all documentation work

of the friend Mr. Pavan Sahani of the complainant and the

accused had assured the complainant and his friend to procure

the Visa & Work permit for Malaysia. It was assured by the

accused that if the accused fail to complete the work, the amount

paid by the complainant would be refunded by the accused. That

the accused had sent Mr. Pavan Sahani to the Malaysia but once

he reached there due to illegal papers and absence of work

permit the authorities of Malaysia country had take the fine from

him for such kind of illegalities and send him back to India

indigently. So he had faced lot of hardship due to false promises

and documentations of the accused, accordingly the accused had

assured to refund the amount to the complainant .

4. That after several demands from the complainant, for making the

payment of the amount taken by the accused, the accused had

issued a cheque no. 000008 dated 05.03.2014 for the amount Rs.

63,000 /- (Sixty Three Thousand) drawn on Bank of India,

University Road, Vadodara Branch towards payment of

refundable amount. The said cheque was issued from the bank
 account maintained by the accused. The accused had assured the

complainant that the said cheque would be honored by accuser’s

bank upon presentation. The said cheque was signed by the

accused in the presence of the complainant .

5. That the cheque issued by the accused was presented by the

complainant in his bank HDFC Bank Ltd, Vadodara Stock

Exchange Building Branch, Vadodara for clearance. But to utter

shock and surprise, the cheque issued by the accused was

dishonored on 21.05.2014 with the endorsement of “Account

Closed” and accordingly the complainant got the intimation of

the said dishonor from his bank vide letter dated 27.05.2014.

That though the accused had assured complainant that the cheque

will be cleared on presentation, the above-mentioned cheque was

dishonored by accuser’s bank.

6. That the complainant further submits that on receiving the said

intimation of cheque dishonor, the complainant had sent a legal

demand notice to the accused through his Advocate on 03.06.2014.

In the notice it was specifically demanded by the complainant that

the said outstanding amount of cheque was to be paid within 15

days from the date of receipt of the notice, however returned

unserved with the enforsement of “Not Known”. Even after receipt

of the notice sent to the accused, he did not pay the said cheque

amount. Hence, he did not comply with the notice that was sent by

the complainant.

7. That the accused had issued the above said cheque in the name of

the complainant to discharge his legal liability and said cheque got

dishonored. On dishonor of the said cheque the complainant had

duly sent a legal demand notice to the accused which was duly
 served upon the accused, but the accused did not bother to pay the

cheque amount to the complainant. The complainant has not

received any amount from the accused till today even after sending

the notice to the accused. Thus, the accused has committed an

offence under section 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act.

8. That to pay the outstanding amount, for which the cheque was

issued, is the whole and sole responsibility of the accused and the

accused had issued the said cheque towards the payment of the

amount that the accused was liable to pay to the complainant.

9. That the complainant relies on following evidences to file this

complaint:

a. Cheque issued and signed by accused

b. Cheque return memo issued by bank of accused

c. Demand notice

d. Postal receipt issued by postal department

e. Proof of service of notice

If required, witnesses may be produced at the time of trial.

10. That the complainant keeps his right reserved for any typographic

or numerological mistake.

--: Prayer :--

Considering the above-mentioned grounds and the grounds that

may be submitted at the time of trail, the complainant most humbly and

respectfully prays:

i. To take the cognizance against the accused U/s. 138 of The

Negotiable Instruments Act;

ii. To issue process against said accused;

iii. That the said accused be punished as hardest as prescribed U/s.

138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act;

 iv. That the accused may be ordered to pay compensation to the

complainant of an amount which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit

in the interest of justice;

v. Any other relief may be granted to the complainant in the interest

of justice as this court may deem just and proper.

FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE COMPLAINANT, AS DUTY

BOUND SHALL FOREVER PRAY.

____________________________________
_

Date : Rushikesh V. Patak

Place : Vadodara Advocate for Complainant