SATEESH JAIN vs UCO BANK

Judgment text excerpt

$~53 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 10th March, 2025. + CRL.M.C. 3662/2018 & CRL.M.A. 28491/2018 SATEESH JAIN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Chandra Shekhar, Mr. Manoj Agarwal, Mr. Prashant Shekhar, Advocates versus UCO BANK .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rajesh Rattan, Mr. Aditya Kumar, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA JUDGMENT SANJEEV NARULA, J. (Oral): 1. The present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, is directed against order dated 31st March, 2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts in Criminal Revision No. 14/2016 (New Case No. 8596/2016) titled as “Sateesh Jain v. UCO Bank” as well as the order dated 28th January, 2016 passed by Metropolitan Magistrate in CC No. 751/1/14, wherein both the Courts have held that there was sufficient material on record to frame notice under Section 251 CrPC against the Applicant for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments 1 “CrPC” Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CRL.M.C. 3662/2018 Page 1 of 11 By:NITIN KAIN Signing Date:12.03.2025 20:47:46 Act, 1881.2 Factual Background 2. The factual background leading to the filing of the present petition, as narrated in the petition, is as follows: 2.1 Accused No. 1, M/s Surya Vinayak Industries Ltd., secured a Short Term Loan3 of INR 50 Crore for a period of six months from the Respondent, UCO Bank, on 30th June, 2011. The pre-disbursement conditions for the sanction of the STL stipulated that Accused No. 1 would furnish post-dated cheques for both the principal instalment and interest. Accordingly, Accused No. 1 provided one undated cheque of INR 50 Crore and five undated cheques of INR 66,66,667/- each to th