DATE: 05.03.

2025

To,

SHO,

Police Station Malviya Nagar,

Near Metro Station, Block A, Shivalik Colony, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi,
Delhi 110017.

CC.

The Commissioner of Police

Jai Singh Marg, Hanuman Road Area,

Connaught Place, New Delhi, Delhi 110001.

SUBJECT: COMPLAINT SEEKING INVESTIGATION INTO THE

FRAUDULENT MISUSE OF CHEQUES AND IDENTIFICATION OF

THE REAL ACCUSED PERSONS INVOLVED IN CRM-M-27027-2016

AND CRM-M-1112-2017.

Respected Sir/Madam,

1. The complainant, a law-abiding citizen and a respected businessman,

engaged in various legitimate business transactions with M/s Aakar India

Developers Pvt. Ltd. as part of his professional commitments. During the

with the intention of fulfilling his obligations, issued a cheque bearing

No. 161702 dated 15.04.2014 for an amount of ₹14,00,000. This cheque

was entrusted to M/s Aakar India Developers Pvt. Ltd. with the

expectation that it would be used solely for the intended purpose within

the agreed-upon terms of their business arrangement.

2. However, contrary to the complainant’s trust and expectations, the

respondent companies, including M/s Aakar India Developers Pvt. Ltd.

and M/s Bhatana Alloys Pvt. Ltd., have fraudulently misused this cheque

without the complainant’s consent or authorization. The complainant was

subsequently made the subject of false and malicious legal complaints

under Sections 138, 141, and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,

1881, causing him immense harm and harassment.

3. This fraudulent misuse of the cheque not only disregards the

complainant’s rights and goodwill but also amounts to a deliberate

attempt to defraud and implicate him in legal proceedings for reasons

beyond his control. The complainant’s reputation, both personal and

professional, has been severely tarnished, and he has suffered mental

agony, financial strain, and significant disruption to his life due to the

baseless allegations and legal battles initiated by the respondents.

4. The complainant had no directorial or managerial control over M/s Aakar

India Developers Pvt. Ltd. after his formal resignation on 25.06.2012, a

submitted as Annexure P-2. This resignation was duly filed and recorded

with the Registrar of Companies, relieving the complainant of any

obligations or responsibilities related to the management, operations, or

financial transactions of the said company. Despite this, the

complainant’s name has been unjustly implicated in legal proceedings

concerning activities that occurred long after his resignation.

5. The cheque in question was issued by the complainant in connection with

a bona fide business transaction based on mutual trust and professional

commitments. It was handed over to M/s Aakar India Developers Pvt.

Ltd. with the understanding that it would be used strictly for the specified

purpose agreed upon by the parties. However, contrary to this

understanding, the respondents, including M/s Aakar India Developers

Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Bhatana Alloys Pvt. Ltd., misappropriated and misused

the cheque for purposes that were neither authorized nor known to the

complainant. This act of fraudulent misuse demonstrates a clear breach of

trust and malicious intent on the part of the respondents.

6. When the cheque was presented for encashment, it was dishonored by the

bank with the remarks “account closed.” This dishonor was solely

attributable to the unauthorized and improper handling of the cheque by

the respondents. Instead of addressing the matter ethically and

professionally, the respondents filed a private complaint against the

Instruments Act, 1881, before the Judicial Magistrate I Class,

Chandigarh. This complaint was filed with the deliberate intention to

harass the complainant and tarnish his reputation, despite his clear

disassociation from the company at the time of the alleged offense.

7. The respondent companies, particularly M/s Bhatana Alloys Pvt. Ltd.,

have falsely implicated the petitioner in the complaints related to the

dishonored cheque. Ltd., was responsible for the financial transaction in

question. However, these allegations are baseless and made with mala

fide intent. The petitioner had formally resigned from his position in M/s

Aakar India Developers Pvt. Ltd. before the date of the transaction in

question. His resignation had been duly communicated and recorded in

compliance with the applicable legal requirements. Therefore, at the time

of the issuance and dishonor of the cheque, the petitioner had no

association, involvement, or control over the company’s financial affairs.

Despite this, the respondents have deliberately and wrongfully dragged

the petitioner into the legal proceedings to harass and malign him.

8. The dishonored cheque, forming the basis of the complaint, was

presented with clear malicious intent. The respondents have willfully

ignored the fact that the petitioner had no authority, control, or financial

responsibility over M/s Aakar India Developers Pvt. Ltd. at the relevant

time. The cheque in question was allegedly issued after the petitioner had
 resigned, thereby making it evident that he could not have been

responsible for the transaction. The respondents’ deliberate act of

presenting the cheque and instituting legal proceedings against the

petitioner reflects an ulterior motive to coerce and intimidate him by

misusing the legal process. Such an action amounts to an abuse of the

judicial process and is liable to be quashed.

9. The respondents initially filed their complaint before the New Delhi

Court, which subsequently returned the complaint due to lack of

jurisdiction. Instead of adhering to due process, the respondents refiled

the complaint before the Chandigarh Court without seeking condonation

of the delay. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the landmark judgment of

Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod v. State of Maharashtra , has clearly

stipulated that in cases of jurisdictional transfers or refiling, the

complainants must ensure procedural compliance, including the seeking

of condonation for any delay. The respondents’ failure to obtain such

condonation renders their complaint procedurally defective and legally

unsustainable. The deliberate bypassing of essential legal formalities

underscores the respondents’ lack of diligence and their intent to harass

the petitioner.

10.The petitioner was wrongfully declared a proclaimed person in violation

of established legal procedures and fundamental rights. The process of

declaring an individual as a proclaimed offender entails strict adherence

affording the accused an opportunity to respond. In the present case, the

respondents failed to ensure due service of notices to the petitioner before

securing the proclamation order. This omission constitutes a flagrant

violation of the petitioner’s rights and the principles of natural justice.

The law mandates that such declarations must be made only in

exceptional circumstances where the accused deliberately evades the

judicial process. In the absence of such circumstances, the issuance of a

proclamation order against the petitioner is not only unwarranted but also

illegal and void. Therefore, the proclamation order must be quashed, and

necessary legal action should be taken against the respondents for

misusing the legal process. The copy of all incidental documents are

annexed and marked to as “Annexure A colly”.

An investigation is needed to establish the actual facts and circumstances

of the case. It helps in collecting admissible and relevant evidence to

support or refute allegations. Through investigation, the individuals or

entities responsible for any wrongdoing can be identified. It ensures that

all legal requirements are met and due process is followed. Investigation

prevents tampering or destruction of crucial evidence. It provides a strong

foundation for prosecution or defense in a court of law. If financial fraud

broader social implications, it ensures justice and protects public interest.

It assists law enforcement agencies in taking appropriate action. A

thorough investigation strengthens the judicial process by ensuring

transparency and reliability in legal proceedings. Kindly registered an

FIR under section Section 316, Section 309, Section 61, Section 303 of

BNS, 2023.

Kuljinder Singh

House No 123

ANAND NAGAR

NEW GRAIN MARKET

PS SADAR

JALLANDHAR

Punjab India 144008

Date: 03-03-2025