Single judge court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act after holding that the accused had deposited the cheque amount plus compensation, thereby extinguishing the cause of action and the criminal liability.
Criminal proceedings under C.R. Case No. 102 of 2008 and CRR 1077 of 2018 are quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
21.03. 2022 item No.5 n.b. ct. no. 34
CRR 1077 of 2018
Somnath Roy Vs.
Tapash Kanti Mondal
Mr. Sandip Chjakraborty, Mr. Arun Kumar Upadhyay
…..for the Petitioner
Mr. Suman Sankar Chatterjee
.. .. for the opposite party.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner be kept with the record.
Record reflects that the petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs.2,40,000/- in two stages.
The purpose for which the Act was amended and provisions of Negotiable Instruments Act were incorporated was with the sole object of speedy remedy in case of cheques being dishonored.
In this case the petitioner approached the Court for cheque being dishonored and the criminal proceedings reached at the stage of Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Having regard to the Judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Damadar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H reported in (2010) 5 SCC 663 and the guidelines set out therein in paragraph 21(i)(b)(c) and in the case of Meters and Instruments Private Limited & Another Vs. Kanchan Mehta reported in (2018)1 SCC 560 I am of the opinion that the amount of the cheque and
2
the extra amount of Rs.40,000/- towards compensation are just and proper in the background of the facts and circumstances of the case and the time at which the present petitioner initially offered the amount. The learned advocate for the complainant is present but he is unwilling to accept the money which has been deposited.
Having considered the primary object of the act particularly civil wrong being converted into a criminal proceeding pursuant to the legislative intention of amendments in the original Act of 1881, the further continuance of C.R. Case No. 102 of 2008 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 4th Court Burdwan is unwarranted. Accordingly, the said proceedings are quashed.
The complainant seems to be emotional in view of other additional facts including the time period, which has elapsed but the Court cannot resolve beyond the legislation and the settled principles of law. Accordingly, the complainant would be at liberty to claim whole of the amount of Rs.2,40,000/- by taking out appropriate application before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 4th Court Burdwan before whom the amount of Rs.2,40,000/- has been deposited by the accused person.
With the aforesaid observations, CRR 1077 of 2018 is allowed.
Interim order, if any, is made absolute.
All pending connected applications, if any, are consequently disposed of.
All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official of this Court.
3
( Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act should be quashed on the accrual of the statutory limitation period.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal HExplained¶13
(2010) 5 SCC 663 · Who else cites this
Meters and Instruments Private Limited & Another Vs. Kanchan MehtaExplained¶13
(2018)1 SCC 560 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Somnath Roy
Tapash Kanti Mondal
Tirthankar Ghosh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
