The High Court acknowledged a money dispute but held that as the claim of coercion regarding cheques could be tried, Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked to quash proceedings under Section 138 N.I. Act.
The criminal petition was dismissed as devoid of merits; interlocutory applications disposed of.
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 KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2861 OF 2018
BETWEEN:
SRI. M. VIJAY KUMAR @ VIJAY NAYAK M., S/O SRI. B. L. MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, PROPRIETOR: AMRUTHA ENTERPRISES, RESIDING AT NO.47/3, 12TH CROSS, 5TH MAIN, WILSON GARDEN, BANGALORE - 560 030.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. N. RAVINDRANATH KAMATH, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR MS. VANAJAKSHI, AND SRI. BALACHANDRA BHAT, ADVOCATES)
Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYAN N Location: High Court of Karnataka
AND:
SVC CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED, NO.1, CENTRAL BANK ROAD, CHAMARAJPET, BANGALORE - 560 018, REPRESENTED BY THEIR DIVISIONAL MANAGER, SRI. SARATHY SOMAIAH.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. K.V. LOKESH, ADVOCATE)
NC: 2023:KHC:25430 CRL.P No. 2861 of 2018
THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.28846/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE XXVI A.C.M.M., BANGALORE FILED AGAINST THE PETITIONER BY THE RESPONDENT FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 138 OF N.I ACT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The captioned petition is filed by the accused seeking quashing of criminal proceedings pending in C.c.No.28846/2017 on the file of XXVI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, 'N.I.Act').
same has been returned with the endorsement "PAYMENT STOPPED BY THE DRAWER". Having issued legal notice to the petitioner/accused, a complaint is lodged for the offence punishable under Sections 138 and 142(b) of N.I.Act.
NC: 2023:KHC:25430 CRL.P No. 2861 of 2018
5. Surprisingly, this Court would find that though
the petitioner/accused has questioned the proceedings on the ground that cheques were secured by the Bank in coercion, at paragraph No.9 of the writ petition, the petitioner/accused has stated that in compliance with the interim order granted in C.Mis.No.1023/2010, a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- has been paid to a demand draft drawn on Karnataka Bank. I have also given my anxious consideration to the interim order granted by this Court. This Court, vide order dated 21.06.2017, in connected matter, i.e., Crl.P.No.4547/2017, was pleased to grant an interim order subject to a deposit of Rs.12,00,000/- with the respondent/bank. If these significant details are taken into consideration, it appears that there is a dispute with regard to the amount that is legally due to the respondent/bank. The petitioner/accused, in all probability, is disputing the quantum claimed by the respondent/bank and not the liability to pay the amount covered under the cheque. If that is the factual matrix,
then I am enable to understand that how the petitioner/accused can seek quashing of the proceedings by invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I am of the view that no relief can be granted in the present case on hand. Whether cheques were obtained by the respondent/bank under
coercion is a matter for trial.
pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is devoid of merits and accordingly, stands dismissed;
The pending interlocutory applications, if any, does not survive for consideration and stands disposed of.
Sd/JUDGE
HDK CT:SNN
1 issue framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings for cheque dishonour under Section 138 N.I. Act can be quashed when the dispute is regarding the quantum of legally recoverable debt and not the liability to pay.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
SRI. M. VIJAY KUMAR @ VIJAY NAYAK M.
SVC CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
