Single Judge quashed application seeking quashing of criminal proceedings for offences under Sections 420 IPC and 138 NI Act, finding a prima facie case existed against the petitioner.
Application for quashing dismissed with liberty to raise points at appropriate stage.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 1448 of 2017
Rahul Raj .... Petitioner Versus
In this application the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 03.09.2016 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro in connection with Complaint Case No. 948 of 2015 by which cognizance has been taken for the offences punishable u/s 420 of the Indian Penal Code and 138 of the N.I. Act.
Submission has been advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner that the opposite party No. 2 was appointed as authorized consultant of BRCM College of Engineering & Technology for liasoning of admission in B.Tech course. It has been stated that a cheque was given by the opposite party No. 2 in view of the authorization of the petitioner, but subsequently the petitioner failed to do the assigned work. It has also been submitted that only the photo copy of the cheque was handed over to the petitioner and the original cheque was handed over later on. It has also been submitted that there is no legally enforceable debt.
The document which has been relied upon is not unimpeachable in nature as such at this stage in a proceeding u/s 482 Cr.P.C. the same cannot be looked into. It appears that two cheques of Rs. 25,000/- were issued in favour of the opposite party No. 2. The same were dishonoured on account of insufÏcient funds, leading to issuance of legal notice and thereafter on account of nonpayment of the amount, complaint case has been instituted.
In such circumstances, there being a prima facie case in existence against the petitioner, I am not inclined to interfere with the criminal proceeding against the petitioners. This application is accordingly disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to raise all his points at the appropriate stage.
(RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.)
MK
2 issues framed by the court
Whether prayer for quashing of order taking cognizance in cheque dishonour case invoking Section 482 Cr.P.C. deserves interference given prima facie case.
Whether petitioner's failure to do assigned work negates existence of legally enforceable debt required for Section 138 NI Act.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Rahul Raj
The State of Jharkhand
Barun Singh @ Varun Singh
Rongon Mukhopadhyay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
