IN THE COURT OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (EAST),

KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI

CC NI ACT/__________/ 2024
IN THE MATTER OF:

MAHARANI GEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ...COMPLAINANT

VERSUS
SALONI RANIWALA ...ACCUSED
POLICE STATION: ______________

INDEX
S.NO. PARTICULARS PAGE NOS.
1. MEMO OF PARTIES A
2. COMPLAINT UNDER
SECTION 138 OF
NEGOTIABLE ACT AS
AMENDED UPTO DATE.
3. LIST OF WITNESSES
4. LIST OF DOCUMENTS
5. CERTIFICATE UNDER
SECTION 65B OF INDIAN
EVIDENCE ACT
6. PRE-SUMMONING
EVIDENCE BY WAY OF
AFFIDAVIT
7. VAKALATNAMA

DELHI COMPLAINANT
DATED
THROUGH

RAJAT GUPTA
ADVOCATE
CHAMBER NO. 23, CIVIL SUPPLY BUILDING,
TIS HAZARI COURT,
DELHI.
 IN THE COURT OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (EAST),
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
CC NI ACT/__________/ 2024
IN THE MATTER OF:

MAHARANI GEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ...COMPLAINANT

VERSUS
SALONI RANIWALA ...ACCUSED
MEMO OF PARTIES

M/s MAHARANI GEMS PVT. LTD.

Through its Director,
Shri________________,
Having its Registered Office at: -
A-73, Main Vikas Marg,
Opp. Metro Pillar No. 62,
Near Nirman Vihar Metro Station,
Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-110092
Mobile Number: - 9810948570 …COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

SMT. SALONI RANIWALA,

W/O SHRI AMIT RANIWALA,
R/O- 43, Shankar Vihar,
Vikas Marg,
Delhi-110092
Mobile Number: - 9810245369 …ACCUSED

DELHI COMPLAINANT
DATED:
THROUGH
RAJAT GUPTA
ADVOCATE
CHAMBER NO. 23, CIVIL SUPPLY BUILDING,
TIS HAZARI COURT, DELHI.
 IN THE COURT OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (EAST),
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
CC NI ACT/__________/ 2024
IN THE MATTER OF:

MAHARANI GEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ...COMPLAINANT

VERSUS
SALONI RANIWALA ...ACCUSED
POLICE STATION: _________________

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 138 OF THE NEGOTIABLE

INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 AS AMENDED UPTO DATE.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the Complainant is a Private Limited Company having its

Registered Office at A-73, Main Vikas Marg,Opp. Metro Pillar No.
62,Near Nirman Vihar Metro Station,Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-110092.

2. That on 03.10.2024, the accused namely Smt.Saloni Raniwala had

approached the complainant personally and asked for a Collateral loan
of Rs.7,20,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Twenty Thousand Only) at the
office of the Complainant for which she had deposited her jewellery
worth Rs.7,20,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Twenty Thousand Only).
The accused also provided a Cheque and the same has been mentioned
on the bill issued by the Complainant to the Accused dated 03.10.2024
and on 03.10.2024, the complainant had given Rs. 7,20,000/- (Rupees
Seven Lakhs Twenty Thousand Only) as a collateral loan to the
accused through Cheque bearing no. 865765 drawn on Axis Bank
Ltd., Swasthya Vihar Branch, New Delhi.

3. That thereafter, the Complainant demanded to repay the collateral

loan amount from the accused multiple times within the stipulated
time but she was not available over the calls and started avoiding the
Complainant. Even after the stipulated time, the accused was making
excuses by asking for some extra days every time to repay the
collateral loan and on 15.10.2024, the accused presented the cheque
 to the complainant to deposit the Cheque No.396754 dated
15.10.2024 for Rs.7,20,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Twenty Thousand
Only) drawn on INDUSIND Bank, IFFCO CHOWK, GURGAON,
and also assured the Complainant that the said cheque would be
encashed upon its presentation to the banker.

4. That on 15.10.2024, in order to discharge the liability towards the

complainant, the said cheque was deposited by the complainant for
encashment into his bank namely ICICI BANK, Laxmi Nagar,
Branch, Delhi and upon the presentation the said cheque was returned
unpaid/dishonoured with remarks “Funds Insufficient” vide
returning memo dated 16.10.2024 and the information regarding the
dishonour of the said cheque was received by the complainant on
16.10.2024.

5. That thereafter, the complainant contacted the accused and informed

the accused about the dishonour of the said cheque. However, the
accused did not take the dishonour of the said cheque seriously and
avoided the same.

6. That the complainant reminded the dishonour of the said cheque and
requested the accused to repay the friendly loan amount. The
complainant requested several times to repay the loan amount as the
loan amount was his hard-earned money but the accused did not take
the loan amount seriously and was/is avoiding the complainant in
respect of the loan amount on one pretext or with other.

7. That the complainant sent a legal notice dated 18.10.2024 to the

accused through his counsel demanding to make payment of the said
cheque of the amount within stipulated period of 15 days from the
date of receipt of the notice.

8. That the Legal Notice dated 18.10.2024 was sent through Speed Post
and delivered on __.10.2024 through Speed Post. However, the
accused failed to pay the said cheque amount to the complainant
within 15 days from the date of receipt of the notice.
9. That the cause of action arose when on 15.10.2024, in order to
discharge the liability towards the complainant, the said cheque was
deposited by the complainant for encashment into his bank namely
ICICI BANK, Laxmi Nagar Branch, Delhi and upon the presentation
the said cheque was returned unpaid/dishonoured with remarks
“Funds Insufficient” vide returning memo dated 16.10.2024 and the
information regarding the dishonour of the said cheque was received
by the complainant on 16.10.2024. The cause of action arose when
the complainant sent a legal notice dated 18.10.2024 to the accused
through his counsel demanding to make payment of the said cheque
of the amount within stipulated period of 15 days from the dated
receipt of the notice. The cause of action further arose when the Legal
Notice dated 18.10.2024 was sent through Speed Post and delivered
on ____.10.2024. However, the accused failed to pay the said cheque
amount to the complainant within 15 days from the date of receipt of
the notice.

10.That the present complaint is based on the dishonour of the said

cheque which was issued in discharge of a lawful debt.

11.That the dishonour of the cheque clearly shows and establishes that
the accused did not intend to honour the amount under the said
cheque.

12.That the said cheque was presented for encashment in the complainant
bank namely ICICI BANK, Laxmi Nagar Branch, Delhi which is
within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. Therefore, this Hon’ble
Court has territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the present
complaint.

13.That the present complaint is within the prescribed period of

limitation under Negotiable Instrument Act.
 PRAYER
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be
pleased to try, summon and punish the accused for the offence under the
provisions of Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881 as amended upto date (Act No. 66 of 1988).
Compensate the complainant for the loss and costs incurred by it and/or any
other order may be passed which this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper
under the facts and circumstances of the complaint in favour of the
complainant and against the accused.

DELHI COMPLAINANT
DATED
THROUGH

RAJAT GUPTA
ADVOCATE
CHAMBER NO. 23, CIVIL SUPPLY BUILDING,
TIS HAZARI COURT,
DELHI.
 IN THE COURT OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (EAST),
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
CC NI ACT/__________/ 2024
IN THE MATTER OF:

MAHARANI GEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ...COMPLAINANT

VERSUS
SALONI RANIWALA ...ACCUSED
LIST OF WITNESSES

1. The Complainant himself.

2. The concerned official from the bank of the complainant.

3. The concerned official from the bank of the accused.

4. The concerned official/post master from the Postal Department.

5. Any other witness/s required by this Hon’ble Court which may deem
fit.

DELHI COMPLAINANT
DATED
THROUGH

RAJAT GUPTA
ADVOCATE
CHAMBER NO. 23, CIVIL SUPPLY BUILDING,
TIS HAZARI COURT,
DELHI.
 IN THE COURT OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (EAST),
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
CC NI ACT/__________/ 2024
IN THE MATTER OF:

MAHARANI GEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ...COMPLAINANT

VERSUS
SALONI RANIWALA ...ACCUSED

LIST OF DOCUMENTS
S.No. Particulars Page Nos.
1. The Original Cheque bearing no.
396754 dated 15.10.2024 drawn on
INDUSIND BANK, IFFCO
CHOWK, Gurgaon Branch as
Annexure “A”
2. The Returning Memo dated
16.10.2024 showing remarks “Funds
Insufficient” as Annexure “B”.
3. The Copy of Legal Notice dated
18.10.2024 sent to the accused as
Annexure “C”.
4. The Original Postal Receipt dated
18.10.2024 as Annexure “D”.
5. The Computer Generated Tracking
Report of Legal Notice as Annexure
“E”
6. The Original Bill along-with ID-
Proof of Accused duly signed by her
as Annexure “F”

DELHI COMPLAINANT
DATED
THROUGH
RAJAT GUPTA
ADVOCATE
CHAMBER NO. 23, CIVIL SUPPLY BUILDING,
TIS HAZARI COURT,
DELHI.
 IN THE COURT OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (EAST),
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
CC NI ACT/__________/ 2024
IN THE MATTER OF:

MAHARANI GEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ...COMPLAINANT

VERSUS
SALONI RANIWALA ...ACCUSED

PRESUMMONING EVIDENCE BY WAY OF AFFIDAVIT.

I, _______________, S/o __________________ Sharma aged about __ years

old, Director of M/s Maharani Gems Pvt. Ltd. do hereby solemenly affirm and
declare as under:

1. I say that I am the deponent/complainant in the above noted case and I

am well conversant with facts of the case and competent to swear this
affidavit.

1. I say that on 03.10.2024, the accused namely Smt.Saloni Raniwala

had approached the complainant personally and asked for a Collateral
loan of Rs.7,20,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Twenty Thousand Only)
at the office of the Complainant for which she had deposited her
jewellery worth Rs.7,20,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Twenty
Thousand Only). The accused also provided a Cheque and the same
has been mentioned on the bill issued by the Complainant to the
Accused dated 03.10.2024 and on 03.10.2024, the complainant had
given Rs. 7,20,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Twenty Thousand Only)
as a collateral loan to the accused through Cheque bearing no. 865765
drawn on Axis Bank Ltd., Swasthya Vihar Branch, New Delhi.

2. I say that thereafter, the deponent demanded to repay the collateral

loan amount from the accused multiple times within the stipulated
time but she was not available over the calls and started avoiding the
Complainant. Even after the stipulated time, the accused was making
excuses by asking for some extra days every time to repay the
collateral loan and on 15.10.2024, the accused presented the cheque
to the complainant to deposit the Cheque No.396754 dated
 15.10.2024 for Rs.7,20,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Twenty Thousand
Only) drawn on INDUSIND Bank, IFFCO CHOWK, GURGAON,
and also assured the Complainant that the said cheque would be
encashed upon its presentation to the banker. The Original Cheque
bearing no. 396754 is Ex-CW1/1.

3. I say that on 15.10.2024, in order to discharge the liability towards the

complainant, the said cheque was deposited by the complainant for
encashment into his bank namely ICICI BANK, Laxmi Nagar,
Branch, Delhi and upon the presentation the said cheque was returned
unpaid/dishonoured with remarks “Funds Insufficient” vide
returning memo dated 16.10.2024 and the information regarding the
dishonour of the said cheque was received by the complainant on
16.10.2024. The Original Returning Memo dated 16.10.2024 is
Ex-CW1/2.

4. I say that thereafter, the deponent contacted the accused and informed
the accused about the dishonour of the said cheque. However, the
accused did not take the dishonour of the said cheque seriously and
avoided the same.

5. I say that the deponent reminded the dishonour of the said cheque and
requested the accused to repay the collateral loan amount. The
deponent requested several times to repay the loan amount as the loan
amount was his hard-earned money but the accused did not take the
loan amount seriously and was/is avoiding the deponent in respect of
the loan amount on one pretext or with other.

6. I say that the deponent sent a Legal Notice dated 18.10.2024 to the
accused through his counsel demanding to make payment of the said
cheque of the amount within stipulated period of 15 days from the
date of receipt of the notice. The Copy of the Legal Notice dated
18.09.2024 is Ex-CW1/3.

7. I say that the Legal Notice dated 18.10.2024 was sent through Speed
Post and delivered on __.10.2024. However, the accused failed to pay
the said cheque amount to the deponent within 15 days from the date
 of receipt of the notice. The Original Postal Receipt dated
18.10.2024 is Ex-CW1/4 and Tracking Report is Ex-CW1/5.

8. I say that the present complaint is based on the dishonour of the said
cheque which was issued in discharge of a lawful debt.

9. I say that the dishonour of the cheque clearly shows and establishes
that the accused did not intend to honour the amount under the said
cheque.

10.I say that the deponent has signed the present complaint which is
exhibited CW1/A and have signed at point “A” and “B” . The
complaint is true and correct and within limitation.

11.I say that the deponent has not filed any other or similar complaint in
respect of the same in any court of law.

DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified at Delhi on this ___day of_____2024 that the contents of this
affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge & belief and
nothing has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT
 IN THE COURT OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE (EAST),
KARKARDOOMA COURTS, DELHI
CC NI ACT/__________/ 2024
IN THE MATTER OF:

MAHARANI GEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ...COMPLAINANT

VERSUS
SALONI RANIWALA ...ACCUSED

CERTIFICATE UNDER SECTION 65-B OF THE INDIAN EVIDENCE

ACT, 1872.

It is certified that the attached Speed Post Tracking Report dated ____________
is a true extract in printed form created in the usual and ordinary course of
business.
It is further certified
1. That the Access to the Computer System and the data stored thereon is
controlled by predefined user permissions exercised through individual and
unique user-id and associates passwords.
2. That physical access to the computer/server room is prevented by locking the
server room and the branch after office hours. Detection of any authorized
changes in the date after day-end and before day-begin activity is carried
through procedures which are built into the application program.
Unauthorized changes in the date during regular working hours are
prevented/detected through verification of outputs with authorized inputs.
3. That in case of system failure, the date is retrieved from the back-up kept on
tape/floppy/cartridge/hard disk, which is under the control of the authorized
personnel of the bank;
4. That back-up is verified by the system during the process of transfer of date
to back-up media.
5. That physical and logical labels identify the date storage devices;
6. That back-up devices and media are kept under lock and key which are in the
custody of the authorized personnel of the bank; and
7. That physical and logical access controls are in place as safeguards against
tampering of the systems.
It is further certified that to the best of our knowledge and belief, the Computer
System that generated and stored this information operated properly at the time
of such generation/storage on data and printout represents correctly the relevant
date.

COMPLAINANT