The appellant sought to quash a Section 138 NI Act complaint alleging insufficient reason to prosecute. The court held that adjudicating disputed facts is for the trial court, so the petition is dismissed in limine.
Crl.M.C. No. 2926 of 2021 is dismissed in limine.
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 KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
MONDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 14TH ASHADHA, 1943
CRL.MC NO. 2926 OF 2021
CC 8016/2016 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT (NI ACT
CASES), ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
SWAPNA SUNIL, AGED 38 YEARS, W/o SUNIL LEO, KALAPPURAKKAL AGENCIES, LALAN TOWER, HIGHCOURT JUNCTION, KOCHI -31, PIN – 682031
BY ADVS. SAM ISAAC POTHIYIL TINU JOHNSON VISHNU DAS SRUTHI DAS PHILIP ARUN M.N. MOHAMED AMJAD K.M JISHMA K.S OSHIN MENDEZ S.SURAJA VINIDHA K
RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANTS & STATE:
Crl.M.C.No.2926 of 2021
2
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C.No.2926 of 2021
3
ORDER
The accused in Annexure A1 complaint in
C.C.No.8016/2016 on the file of the JFCM (NI Act Cases), Ernakulam, alleging offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, came up to quash
the complaint on the ground that there is no
sufficient reason to prosecute the accused for the said offence. The reason advanced requires adjudication by the trial court. This Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot go into a roving enquiry with respect to the disputed facts by usurping the powers of the trial court. Hence, the Crl.M.C. will not lie. As such, the Crl.M.C. is dismissed in limine.
Sd/-
P.SOMARAJAN
JUDGE
DMR/-
Crl.M.C.No.2926 of 2021
4
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE:
| ANNEXURE |
A1 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 3rd RESPONDENT BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT (NI ACT CASES) PALLURUTHY, NOW PENDING AS CC No.8016/2016 ON THE FILES OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGSITRATE COURT (NI ACT CASES) ERNAKULAM. |
|---|---|
| ANNEXURE |
A2 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.2.2019 IN BAIL APPLICATION 7441 OF 2018. |
| ANNEXURE |
A3 : THE TRUE COPY OF THE CASE STATUS OF WPC No.23570/ 2020 FILED BY GRAFFIN RAPHEAL AND OTHERS AGAINST RESPONDENT. |
| ANNEXURE |
A4 : THE TRUE COPY OF THE CASE STATUS OF WP(C) No.12192/ 2020 FILED BY GEETHA GANGADHARAN AGAINST RESPONDENT |
| ANNEXURE |
A5 : THE TRUE COPY OF THE CASE STATUS OF WP(C) No.25530/ 2019 FILED BY A. ABDUL SATHAR AND OTHERS AGAINST RESPONDENT |
| ANNEXURE |
A6 : THE TRUE COPY OF THE CASE STATUS OF WP(C) No.40227/ 2018 FILED BY SANDHYA S. NAIR AND OTHERS AGAINST RESPONDENT. |
| RESPONDEN | TS' ANNEXURE: NIL |
| // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can quash a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act without adjudicating disputed facts.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
SWAPNA SUNIL
KERALA HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED
G. UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR
REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES
P.SOMARAJAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
