138 Jitender

S.K.SINGH & ASSOCIATES Chamber No.
811
Advocates Dwarka Court Complex
New delhi-110075
Mobile No.9971143969
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REGISTERED-AD/SPEED POST
DATED: 03.05.2017
To,
Ms. Geeta Sunil Singh Tomar

W/o Sunil Singh Tomar
R/o H-14, Gali No.1, Shastri Park,
North east Delhi-110053
LEGAL DEMAND NOTICE
Under instructions from and on behalf of my client Sh.

Jitender Kumar S/o Sh. D.H. Sharma R/o RZF-756/44, Street No.1,
Rajnagar Part-II, Palam Colony, New Delhi-110045, I hereby serve upon
you the following legal notice as under:
1. That you were family friend of my client. Your husband namely Sunil
Singh Tomar was running a partnership firm with the relative of my
client namely Manjeet Kumar by the name and style of “M/S Geeta
Enterprises” from the above said address, hence there was complete
faith and trust between you and my client.
2. That you, along with your husband and relative of my client namely
manjeet approached my client in first week of September, 2016 with
request of a friendly loan of Rs.2,20,000/- for a period of six month as
you were in dire need of money and you assured my client that you
would repay the said loan on or before the expiry of above period.
3. That keeping the relation in view, and believing your representation and
assurance to be true and genuine, my client agreed and paid
Rs.2,20,000/- in cash to you, on 18th September, 2016.
4. That you, the noticee, came to house of my client with your husband
and my relative namely Manjeet and in order to discharge your debt
and liability, you issued cheque bearing No.017449 dated 10.04.2017
of Rs.2,20,000/- in favour of my client drawn on Union Bank Of
India, Kashmiri Gate, New Delhi-110006 and assured that the cheque
would be encashed on its presentation.
5. That accordingly my client, believing upon your assurances, presented

the cheque bearing No. 017449 dated 10.04.2017 for Rs.2,20,000/-
for encashment through his bankers Axis bank Limited, Sector-7,
Dwarka, New Delhi, at your request and was shocked when the same
was returned unpaid by your banker with memos dated 11.04.2017
due to reason ‘payment stopped by drawer’.
6. That my client informed you regarding the dishonourment of the above

said cheque but you neglected to pay the same despite various
requests from my client and you are lingering on the matter on one
pretext or the other.
7. That the abovesaid cheque was issued by you in discharge of your

legally enforceable debts and liabilities and you had instructed my
client to present the above said cheque and assured that the same
would be encashed on its presentation, but in fact, the same has been
dishonoured due to ‘‘payment stopped by drawer’ In your account
to honour the said cheque. Thus, from your acts and conduct it is
crystal clear that you had issued the above said cheque in favour of
my client knowing fully well that the account from which the said
cheque was drawn, cannot honour the said cheque and that you knew
it very well that the said cheque would be dishonoured on its
presentation.
8. That by your above acts and omissions, you have committed the offence
punishable u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, if you do not
make the payment covered by the above said dishonour cheque to my
client within the period of 15 days from the date of receiving this legal
notice, you may be punished for imprisonment upto two years and
fine upto the double the amount of cheque.
I, therefore by virtue of this Legal notice, call upon you, to make the
payment covered by the above said dishonoured cheque bearing No.
017449 dated 10.04.2017 for Rs.2,20,000/ (Rupees Two Lakhs Twenty
Thousand Only) to my client within a period of fifteen days from the date
of receipt of this notice, failing which my client shall be constrained to
initiate appropriate legal proceedings, both civil as well as criminal,
against you in the Courts of Law for your prosecution for the offence under
section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and for the recovery of the
said amount from you at your costs, risks and consequences.
You are further liable to pay Rs.5500/- towards the cost of this legal
notice.
Copy kept in my office for future reference.
S.K.Singh
Advocate
S.K.SINGH & ASSOCIATES Chamber No.811

Advocates Dwarka Court Complex
New delhi-110075
Mobile No.9971143969
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REGISTERED-AD/SPEED POST
DATED: 03.05.2017
To,
Ms. Geeta Sunil Singh Tomar

W/o Sunil Singh Tomar
R/o H-14, Gali No.1, Shastri Park,
North east Delhi-110053
LEGAL DEMAND NOTICE
Under instructions from and on behalf of my client Sh.

Manjeet Kumar S/o Sh. Ram Tirath Sharma R/o H.No. I-100, Street
No.35, Raj Puri, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi-110059, I hereby serve upon you
the following legal notice as under:
1. That you were family friend of my client. Your husband namely Sunil
Singh Tomar was running a partnership firm with my client namely
Manjeet Kumar by the name and style of “M/S Geeta Enterprises”
from the above said address, hence there was complete faith and trust
between you and my client.
2. That you, the noticee approached my client in last week of September,

2016 with request of a friendly loan of Rs.3,00,000/- for a period of
six month as you were in dire need of money and you assured my
client that you would repay the said loan on or before the expiry of
above period.
3. That keeping the relation in view, and believing your representation

and assurance to be true and genuine, my client agreed and paid
Rs.3,00,000/- in cash to you, on 1st October, 2016.
4. That you, the noticee, in order to discharge your debt and liability,
you issued two cheques bearing No.017450 dated 02.04.2017 of
Rs.1,50,000/- and 0184055 dated 02.04.2017 of Rs.1,50,000/- in
favour of my client drawn on Union Bank Of India, Kashmiri Gate,
New Delhi-110006 and assured that the cheques would be encashed
on their presentation.
5. That accordingly my client, believing upon your assurances,

presented the cheques bearing No. 017450 dated 02.04.2017 of
Rs.1,50,000/- and 0184055 dated 02.04.2017 of Rs.1,50,000/- for
encashment through his bankers Central Bank Of India, Dwarka
Sector-19, New Delhi-110075, at your request and was shocked when
the same were returned unpaid by your banker with memos dated
11.04.2017 due to reason ‘payment stopped by drawer’.
6. That my client informed you regarding the dishonourment of the

above said cheques but you neglected to pay the same despite various
requests from my client and you are lingering on the matter on one
pretext or the other.
7. That the abovesaid cheques were issued by you in discharge of your

legally enforceable debts and liabilities and you had instructed my
client to present the above said cheques and assured that the same
would be encashed on their presentation, but in fact, the same has
been dishonoured due to ‘‘payment stopped by drawer’ in your
account. Thus, from your acts and conduct it is crystal clear that you
had issued the above said cheques in favour of my client knowing
fully well that the account from which the said cheques was drawn,
cannot honour the said cheques and that you knew it very well that
the said cheques would be dishonoured on their presentation.
8. That by your above acts and omissions, you have committed the
offence punishable u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, if you
do not make the payment covered by the above said dishonour
cheques to my client within the period of 15 days from the date of
receiving this legal notice, you may be punished for imprisonment
upto two years and fine upto the double the amount of cheques.
I, therefore by virtue of this Legal notice, call upon you, to make the
payment covered by the above said dishonoured cheques bearing No.
017450 dated 02.04.2017 of Rs.1,50,000/- and 0184055 dated
02.04.2017 of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Only) to my client
within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of this notice, failing
which my client shall be constrained to initiate appropriate legal
proceedings, both civil as well as criminal, against you in the Courts of
Law for your prosecution for the offence under section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act and for the recovery of the said amount from
you at your costs, risks and consequences.
You are further liable to pay Rs.5500/- towards the cost of this legal
notice.
Copy kept in my office for future reference.
S.K.Singh
Advocate
IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
DWARKA COURT, NEW DELHI
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT NO. OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF:
JITENDER KUMAR … COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
GEETA SUNIL SINGH TOMAR … ACCUSED
P.S. DWARKA SOUTH
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT

ACT, 1881 AS AMENDED UPTO DATE
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. That the accused was family friend of my client. Her husband

namely Sunil Singh Tomar was running a partnership firm with the
relative of complainant namely Manjeet Kumar by the name and
style of “M/S Geeta Enterprises” from the above said address, hence
there was complete faith and trust between accused and
complainant.
2. That the accused along with her husband and relative of

complainant namely Manjeet approached complainant in first week
of September, 2016 with request of a friendly loan of Rs.2,20,000/-
for a period of six month as she was in dire need of money and she
assured complainant that you would repay the said loan on or
before the expiry of above period.
3. That keeping the relation in view, and believing her representation

and assurance to be true and genuine, complainant agreed and paid
Rs.2,20,000/- in cash to accused, on 18th September, 2016.
4. That the accused came to house of complainant with her husband
and relative of complainant namely Manjeet and in order to
discharge debt and liability, she issued cheque bearing No.017449
dated 10.04.2017 of Rs.2,20,000/- in favour of complainant drawn
on Union Bank Of India, Kashmiri Gate, New Delhi-110006 on
18.09.2016 and assured that the cheque would be encashed on its
presentation.
5. That accordingly complainant, believing upon her assurances,

presented the cheque bearing No. 017449 dated 10.04.2017 for
Rs.2,20,000/- for encashment through his bankers Axis bank
Limited, Sector-7, Dwarka, New Delhi, at her request and was
shocked when the same was returned unpaid by her banker with
memos dated 11.04.2017 due to reason ‘payment stopped by
drawer’. The original cheque is annexed herewith as Annexure-A.
6. That the complainant informed the accused regarding the

dishonourment of the above said cheque but she neglected to pay
the same despite various requests from the complainant and
lingering on the matter on one pretext or the other.
7. That the above said cheque was issued by the accused, in discharge
of her legally enforceable debts and liabilities and she had instructed
the complainant to present the said cheque and assured that the
same would be duly encashed on its presentation, but in fact, the
same has been dishonoured due to ‘payment stopped by drawer’
and her banker could not honour the said cheque. Thus, from her
acts and conduct it is crystal clear that she had issued the said
cheque in favour of the complainant knowing fully well that the
account from which the said cheque was drawn, cannot honour the
said cheque and the accused knew it very well that the said cheque
would be dishonoured on its presentation. The returning memo is
annexed herewith as Annexure-B.
8. That having left no other option with him, the complainant got
issued a legal demand notice through his counsel on 03.05.2017
and the same was sent to the accused by way of
speed-post/registered Ad. The legal notice has been served upon the
accused, but the accused neither sent any reply to the legal notice
nor paid the demanded amount covered by the above said
dishonoured cheque within stipulated period or even till the filing of
the present complaint. The copy of legal notice, postal receipts and
internet generated proof of delivery report are annexed herewith as
Annexure-C, D (Colly), and E respectively.
9. That the above said cheque has been issued by the accused against
her legally enforceable debts and liability towards the complainant.
10. That the accused failed to pay the amount covered by the
dishonoured cheque within 15 days from the date of receiving this
notice of demand or even till date of filing the present complaint,
hence, the accused has committed an offence punishable under
section 138 of N. I. Act and for which the accused may be punished
in accordance with law.
11. That the complaint is being filed well within the period of limitation
as prescribed under section 138 of N. I. Act, 1881 as amended up to
date.
12. That the complainant has not filed similar complaint seeking similar
relief in the any court of India in respect of cheque bearing No.
017449 dated 10.04.2017 for Rs.2,20,000/- for encashment through
his bankers Axis bank Limited, Sector-7, Dwarka, New Delhi.
13. That the legal notice was sent to the correct address of the accused
which was duly received by him and internet tracking report is
already annexed herewith as Annexure-F & G and same is obtain
from official website of the Indian Post and same are genuine.
14. That the bank of the complainant situated within the jurisdiction of
this Hon’ble court i.e. Dwarka Sector-5, New Delhi, Legal Notice has
been sent to the accused from New Delhi and hence this Hon’ble
Court has competent jurisdiction to entertain, try, and adjudicate
the present complaint and punish the accused according to law.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble

Court may kindly be pleased to take cognizance of the offence and to
summon, try, adjudicate and punish the accused person in accordance
with the law for the offence committed by them punishable under section
138 or the negotiable instrument act as amended up to date and pass
any other such relief in favour of the complainant and against the
accused as deem fit and proper, in the interest of justice.
Complainant
Through
S.K.Singh & Associates

Advocates
New Delhi Ch.No.811, Dwarka Court Complex
Dated: New Delhi
IN THE MATTER OF:
VERSUS
MEMO OF PARTIES
SH. JITENDER KUMAR

S/O SH. D.H. SHARMA
R/O RZF-756/44, STREET NO.1,
RAJNAGAR PART-II, PALAM COLONY,
NEW DELHI-110045 … COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
MS. GEETA SUNIL SINGH TOMAR

W/O SUNIL SINGH TOMAR
R/O H-14, GALI NO.1, SHASTRI PARK,
NORTH EAST DELHI-110053 … ACCUSED
Complainant
Through

Advocates
Dated: New Delhi
IN THE MATTER OF:
VERSUS
LIST OF WITNESSES
1. The complainant
2. The record clerk/any authorized person from the complainant

Bank i.e. Union Bank Of India, Kashmiri Gate, New Delhi-110006
along with record of dishonored cheque bearing No. 017449 dated
10.04.2017 for Rs.2,20,000/-
3. The record clerk/any authorized person from the accused Bank i.e.
Axis bank Limited, Sector-7, Dwarka, New Delhi along with record
of dishonored cheque bearing No. 017449 dated 10.04.2017 for
Rs.2,20,000/-
4. Any other or further witness (s) with the prior permission of this
Hon’ble Court.
Complainant
Through

Advocates
Dated: New Delhi
IN THE MATTER OF:
VERSUS
LIST OF DOCUMENTS
1. The cheque bearing No.017449 dated 10.04.2017 for

Rs.2,20,000/-
2. The returning memo dated 11.04.2017.
3. The Legal Notice dated 03.05.2017.
4. The postal receipts.
5. The computer generated proof of delivery report.
6. Any other or further document/s with the prior permission of this
Hon’ble Court.
C
omplainant
Through

Advocates
Dated: New Delhi
IN THE MATTER OF:
VERSUS
INDEX
Sr. No. Particular Page No.
1 Memo of Parties
2 Complaint u/s 138 N.I.Act as amended

upto date
3 List of documents along with

documents
4 List of Witnesses
5 Vakalatnama
Complainant
Through

Advocates
Dated: New Delhi
IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF MS. PARIDHI GUPTA, LD. MM,
IN THE MATTER OF:
VERSUS
EVIDENCE BY WAY OF AFFIDAVIT (PRE SUMMONING EVIDENCE)
I, Sh. Jitender Kumar S/o Sh. D. H. Sharma R/o RZF-756/44, Street

No.1, Rajnagar Part-II, Palam Colony, New Delhi-110045, do hereby
solemnly affirm and declare on oath as under:-
1. That the deponent is the complainant in the above said complaint

case and well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the
case and competent to swear this affidavit.
2. That the accused was family friend of deponent. Her husband

namely Sunil Singh Tomar was running a partnership firm with
the relative of complainant namely Manjeet Kumar by the name
and style of “M/S Geeta Enterprises” from the above said address,
hence there was complete faith and trust between accused and
deponent.
3. That the accused along with her husband and relative of deponent
namely Manjeet approached deponent in first week of September,
six month as she was in dire need of money and she assured
deponent that you would repay the said loan on or before the
expiry of above period.
and assurance to be true and genuine, deponent agreed and paid
Rs.2,20,000/- in cash to accused, on 18th September, 2016.
5. That the accused came to house of deponent with her husband

and relative of deponent namely Manjeet and in order to discharge
debt and liability, she issued cheque bearing No.017449 dated
10.04.2017 of Rs.2,20,000/- in favour of deponent drawn on
Union Bank Of India, Kashmiri Gate, New Delhi-110006 on
18.09.2016 and assured that the cheque would be encashed on its
presentation.
6. That accordingly deponent, believing upon her assurances,

presented the cheque bearing No. 017449 dated 10.04.2017 for
Rs.2,20,000/- for encashment through branch of his bankers Axis
bank Limited, Sector-7, Dwarka, New Delhi, at her request and
was shocked when the same was returned unpaid by her banker
with memos dated 11.04.2017 due to reason ‘payment stopped
by drawer’. The original cheque is exhibited as Ex.CW1/A.
7. That the deponent informed the accused regarding the

dishonourment of the above said cheque but she neglected to pay
the same despite various requests from the deponent and lingering
on the matter on one pretext or the other.
8. That the above said cheque was issued by the accused, in

discharge of her legally enforceable debts and liabilities and she
had instructed the deponent to present the said cheque and
assured that the same would be duly encashed on its presentation,
but in fact, the same has been dishonoured due to ‘payment
stopped by drawer’ and her banker could not honour the said
cheque. Thus, from her acts and conduct it is crystal clear that she
had issued the said cheque in favour of the deponent knowing fully
well that the account from which the said cheque was drawn,
cannot honour the said cheque and the accused knew it very well
that the said cheque would be dishonoured on its presentation.
The returning memo is exhibited as Ex.CW1/B.
9. That having left no other option with him, the deponent got issued
a legal demand notice through his counsel on 03.05.2017 and the
same was sent to the accused by way of speed-post/registered Ad.
The legal notice has been served upon the accused, but the
accused neither sent any reply to the legal notice nor paid the
demanded amount covered by the above said dishonoured cheque
within stipulated period or even till the filing of the present
complaint. The copy of legal notice, postal receipts and internet
generated proof of delivery report are exhibited as Ex.CW1/C,
Ex.CW1/D (Colly), and Ex.CW1/E and Ex.CW1/F.
10. That the above said cheque has been issued by the accused
against her legally enforceable debts and liability towards the
deponent.
section 138 of N. I. Act and for which the accused may be
punished in accordance with law.
as prescribed under section 138 of N. I. Act, 1881 as amended up
to date and the said complaint is exhibited as Ex.CW1/G bears my
signature at point A and B.
13. That the deponent has not filed similar complaint seeking similar
relief in the any court of India in respect of cheque bearing No.
017449 dated 10.04.2017 for Rs.2,20,000/- for encashment
through his bankers Axis bank Limited, Sector-7, Dwarka, New
Delhi.
15. That the home branch of bank of the complainant situated within
the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble court i.e. Dwarka Sector-5, New
Delhi, Legal Notice has been sent to the accused from New Delhi
and hence this Hon’ble Court has competent jurisdiction to
entertain, try, and adjudicate the present complaint and punish
the accused according to law.
DEPON
ENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified at New Delhi on this day of June, 2017 that the contents of
the above affidavit are true and correct and nothing material has been
concealed thereform.
DEPONENT
IN THE MATTER OF:
MANJEET KUMAR … COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
P.S. DABRI
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT

ACT, 1881 AS AMENDED UPTO DATE
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. That the accused was family friend of my client. Her husband

namely Sunil Singh Tomar was running a partnership firm with the
complainant namely Manjeet Kumar by the name and style of “M/S
Geeta Enterprises” from the above said address, hence there was
complete faith and trust between accused and complainant.
2. That accused approached complainant in first week of September,

complainant that she would repay the said loan on or before the

and assurance to be true and genuine, complainant agreed and paid
Rs.3,00,000/- in cash to accused, on 01st October, 2016.
4. That the accused, in order to discharge her debt and liability, she
issued cheques bearing No.017450 dated 02.04.2017 of
favour of complainant drawn on Union Bank Of India, Kashmiri
Gate, New Delhi-110006 on 01.10.2016 and assured that the
cheques would be encashed on their presentation.
5. That accordingly complainant, believing upon her assurances,

presented the cheques bearing No. 017450 dated 02.04.2017 for
encashment through his bankers Central Bank Of India, Dwarka
Sector-19, New Delhi-110075, at her request and was shocked when
the same were returned unpaid by her banker with memos dated
11.04.2017 due to reason ‘payment stopped by drawer’. The
original cheques are annexed herewith as Annexure-A & B. The
returning memos are annexed herewith as Annexure-C & D.
6. That the complainant informed the accused regarding the

dishonourment of the above said cheques but she neglected to pay
the same despite various requests from the complainant and
lingering on the matter on one pretext or the other.
7. That the above said cheques were issued by the accused, in

discharge of her legally enforceable debts and liabilities and she had
instructed the complainant to present the said cheques and assured
that the same would be duly encashed on their presentation, but in
fact, the same have been dishonoured due to ‘payment stopped by
drawer’ and her banker could not honour the said cheques. Thus,
from her acts and conduct it is crystal clear that she had issued the
said cheques in favour of the complainant knowing fully well that
the account from which the said cheques were drawn, cannot
honour the said cheques and the accused knew it very well that the
said cheques would be dishonoured on their presentation.
8. That having left no other option with him, the complainant got
issued a legal demand notice through his counsel on 03.05.2017
and the same was sent to the accused by way of
speed-post/registered Ad. The legal notice has been served upon the
accused, but the accused neither sent any reply to the legal notice
nor paid the demanded amount covered by the above said
dishonoured cheque within stipulated period or even till the filing of
the present complaint. The copy of legal notice, postal receipts and
internet generated proof of delivery report are annexed herewith as
Annexure-C, D (Colly), and E respectively.
9. That the above said cheques have been issued by the accused
complainant.
section 138 of N. I. Act and for which the accused may be punished
in accordance with law.
as prescribed under section 138 of N. I. Act, 1881 as amended up to
date.
12. That the complainant has not filed similar complaint seeking similar
relief in the any court of India in respect of cheques bearing No.
017450 dated 02.04.2017 for Rs.1,50,000/- and 184055 dated
02.04.2017 of Rs.1,50,000/- for encashment through his bank i.e.
Central Bank Of India, Dwarka Sector-19, New Delhi-110075.
already annexed herewith as Annexure-F and G and same is obtain
14. That the bank of the complainant situated within the jurisdiction of
this Hon’ble court i.e. Rajapuri, Near Secror-4, Dwarka, New Delhi-
110059, Legal Notice has been sent to the accused from New Delhi
and hence this Hon’ble Court has competent jurisdiction to
entertain, try, and adjudicate the present complaint and punish the
accused according to law.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court

may kindly be pleased to take cognizance of the offence and to summon,
try, adjudicate and punish the accused person in accordance with the
law for the offence committed by them punishable under section 138 or
the negotiable instrument act as amended up to date and pass any other
such relief in favour of the complainant and against the accused as deem
fit and proper, in the interest of justice.
Complainant
Through

Advocates
Dated: New Delhi
IN THE MATTER OF:
VERSUS
MEMO OF PARTIES
MANJEET KUMAR
S/O SH. RAM TIRATH SHARMA
R/O H.NO. I-100, STREET NO.35,
RAJ PURI, UTTAM NAGAR,
NEW DELHI-110059 COMLAINANT
VERSUS
MS. GEETA SUNIL SINGH TOMAR

W/O SUNIL SINGH TOMAR
R/O H-14, GALI NO.1, SHASTRI PARK,
NORTH EAST DELHI-110053 … ACCUSED
Complainant
Through

Advocates
Dated: New Delhi
IN THE MATTER OF:
VERSUS
LIST OF WITNESSES
1. The complainant
2. The record clerk/any authorized person from the complainant

Bank i.e. Central Bank Of India, Dwarka Sector-19, New Delhi-
110075 along with record of dishonored cheque bearing No.
02.04.2017 of Rs.1,50,000/-
3. The record clerk/any authorized person from the accused Bank i.e.
Union Bank Of India, Kashmiri Gate, New Delhi-110006 along with
record of dishonored cheque bearing No. 017450 dated 02.04.2017
for Rs.1,50,000/- and 184055 dated 02.04.2017 of Rs.1,50,000/-
4. Any other or further witness (s) with the prior permission of this
Hon’ble Court.
Complainant
Through

Advocates
Dated: New Delhi
IN THE MATTER OF:
VERSUS
LIST OF DOCUMENTS
1. The cheque bearing No.017450 dated 02.04.2017 for
Rs.1,50,000/- .
2. The cheque bearing No.184055 dated 02.04.2017 of
Rs.1,50,000/-.
3. The returning memos dated 11.04.2017.
4. The returning memos dated 11.04.2017.
5. The legal Notice dated 03.05.2017.
6. The postal receipts.
7. The computer generated proof of delivery report.
8. Any other or further document/s with the prior permission of this
Hon’ble Court.
C
omplainant
Through

Advocates
Dated: New Delhi
IN THE MATTER OF:
VERSUS
INDEX
Sr. No. Particular Page No.
1 Memo of Parties
2 Complaint u/s 138 N.I.Act as amended

upto date
3 List of documents along with

documents
4 List of Witnesses
5 Vakalatnama
Complainant
Through

Advocates
Dated: New Delhi
IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF MS. PARIDHI GUPTA, LD. MM,
IN THE MATTER OF:
VERSUS
EVIDENCE BY WAY OF AFFIDAVIT (PRE SUMMONING EVIDENCE)
I, Sh. Manjeet Kumar S/o Sh. Ram Tirath Sharma R/o H.No. I-100,
Street No.35, Raja Puri, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi-110059, do hereby
solemnly affirm and declare on oath as under:-
1. That the deponent is the complainant in the above said complaint

case and well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the
case and competent to swear this affidavit.
2. That the accused was family friend of deponent. Her husband

namely Sunil Singh Tomar was running a partnership firm with
complainant namely Manjeet Kumar by the name and style of
“M/S Geeta Enterprises” from the above said address, hence there
was complete faith and trust between accused and deponent.
3. That accused approached deponent in first week of September,

deponent that she would repay the said loan on or before the

and assurance to be true and genuine, complainant agreed and
paid Rs.3,00,000/- in cash to accused, on 01st October, 2016.
5. That the accused, in order to discharge her debt and liability, she
issued cheques bearing No.017450 dated 02.04.2017 of
favour of deponent drawn on Union Bank Of India, Kashmiri Gate,
New Delhi-110006 on 01.10.2016 and assured that the cheques
would be encashed on their presentation.
6. That accordingly deponent, believing upon her assurances,

presented the cheques bearing No. 017450 dated 02.04.2017 for
encashment through his branch bankers Central Bank Of India,
Dwarka Sector-19, New Delhi-110075, at her request and was
shocked when the same were returned unpaid by her banker with
memos dated 11.04.2017 due to reason ‘payment stopped by
drawer’. The original cheques are exhibited as Ex.CW1/A & B.
The returning memos are exhibited as Ex.CW1/C & D.
7. That the deponent informed the accused regarding the

dishonourment of the above said cheques but she neglected to pay
the same despite various requests from the deponent and lingering
on the matter on one pretext or the other.
8. That the above said cheques was issued by the accused, in

discharge of her legally enforceable debts and liabilities and she
had instructed the deponent to present the said cheques and
assured that the same would be duly encashed on their
presentation, but in fact, the same has been dishonoured due to
‘payment stopped by drawer’ and her banker could not honour
the said cheques. Thus, from her acts and conduct it is crystal
clear that she had issued the said cheques in favour of the
deponent knowing fully well that the account from which the said
cheques was drawn, cannot honour the said cheques and the
accused knew it very well that the said cheques would be
dishonoured on their presentation.
9. That having left no other option with him, the deponent got issued
a legal demand notice through his counsel on 03.05.2017 and the
same was sent to the accused by way of speed-post/registered Ad.
The legal notice has been served upon the accused, but the
accused neither sent any reply to the legal notice nor paid the
demanded amount covered by the above said dishonoured cheques
within stipulated period or even till the filing of the present
complaint. The copy of legal notice, postal receipts and internet
generated proof of delivery report are exhibited as Ex.CW1/E,
Ex.CW1/F (Colly), Ex.CW1/G and Ex.CW1/H.
10. That the above said cheques have been issued by the accused
deponent.
dishonoured chequed within 15 days from the date of receiving
this notice of demand or even till date of filing the present
complaint, hence, the accused has committed an offence
punishable under section 138 of N. I. Act and for which the
accused may be punished in accordance with law.
as prescribed under section 138 of N. I. Act, 1881 as amended up
to date and the said complaint is exhibited as Ex.CW1/I bear my
signature at point A and B.
13. That the deponent has not filed similar complaint seeking similar
relief in the any court of India in respect of cheques bearing No.
02.04.2017 of Rs.1,50,000/- for encashment through branch
bankers Central Bank Of India, Dwarka Sector-19, New Delhi-
110075, however the main branch is situated at Rajapuri, Near
sector-4, Dwarka, New Delhi-110059.
15. That the branch of the bank of the complainant situated within the
jurisdiction of this Hon’ble court i.e. Dwarka Sector-19, New Delhi-
110075, however the main branch is situated at Rajapuri, Near
sector-4, Dwarka, New Delhi-110059, Legal Notice has been sent
to the accused from New Delhi and hence this Hon’ble Court has
competent jurisdiction to entertain, try, and adjudicate the present
complaint and punish the accused according to law.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified at New Delhi on this day of June, 2017 that the contents of
the above affidavit are true and correct and nothing material has been
concealed thereform.
DEPONENT

138 Jitender

Uploaded by

Copyright:

138 Jitender

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

138 Jitender

Uploaded by

Copyright:

S.K.SINGH & ASSOCIATES Chamber No.

Ms. Geeta Sunil Singh Tomar

LEGAL DEMAND NOTICE

Under instructions from and on behalf of my client Sh.

5. That accordingly my client, believing upon your assurances, presented

6. That my client informed you regarding the dishonourment of the above

7. That the abovesaid cheque was issued by you in discharge of your

Copy kept in my office for future reference.

S.K.SINGH & ASSOCIATES Chamber No.811

Ms. Geeta Sunil Singh Tomar

LEGAL DEMAND NOTICE

Under instructions from and on behalf of my client Sh.

2. That you, the noticee approached my client in last week of September,

3. That keeping the relation in view, and believing your representation

5. That accordingly my client, believing upon your assurances,

6. That my client informed you regarding the dishonourment of the

7. That the abovesaid cheques were issued by you in discharge of your

Copy kept in my office for future reference.

CRIMINAL COMPLAINT NO. OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

JITENDER KUMAR … COMPLAINANT

GEETA SUNIL SINGH TOMAR … ACCUSED

P.S. DWARKA SOUTH

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 138 OF NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the accused was family friend of my client. Her husband

2. That the accused along with her husband and relative of

3. That keeping the relation in view, and believing her representation

5. That accordingly complainant, believing upon her assurances,

6. That the complainant informed the accused regarding the

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble

S.K.Singh & Associates

CRIMINAL COMPLAINT NO. OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

JITENDER KUMAR … COMPLAINANT

GEETA SUNIL SINGH TOMAR … ACCUSED

SH. JITENDER KUMAR

MS. GEETA SUNIL SINGH TOMAR

S.K.Singh & Associates

CRIMINAL COMPLAINT NO. OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

JITENDER KUMAR … COMPLAINANT

GEETA SUNIL SINGH TOMAR … ACCUSED

2. The record clerk/any authorized person from the complainant

S.K.Singh & Associates

CRIMINAL COMPLAINT NO. OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

JITENDER KUMAR … COMPLAINANT

GEETA SUNIL SINGH TOMAR … ACCUSED

1. The cheque bearing No.017449 dated 10.04.2017 for

2. The returning memo dated 11.04.2017.

3. The Legal Notice dated 03.05.2017.

4. The postal receipts.

5. The computer generated proof of delivery report.

6. Any other or further document/s with the prior permission of this

S.K.Singh & Associates

CRIMINAL COMPLAINT NO. OF 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

JITENDER KUMAR … COMPLAINANT

GEETA SUNIL SINGH TOMAR … ACCUSED

Sr. No. Particular Page No.

2 Complaint u/s 138 N.I.Act as amended