Petitioner sought quashing of cheque bouncing complaints. Held that factual grounds fall within appreciation of evidence for the trial court; High Court barred from interfering. Petitions dismissed.
Petitions dismissed; presence of petitioner dispensed with except for Section 313 Cr.P.C. questioning and judgment.
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.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 30.10.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
CRL.O.P.(MD) Nos.11139, 11147 and 11149 of 2017 and Crl.M.P.(MD)Nos.7635 to 7638, 7640 and 7641 of 2017
V.Sam Robinson ... Petitioner in all Crl.O.Ps.,
Vs
C.Kolappa Pillai ... Respondent in all Crl.O.Ps.,
COMMON PRAYER: Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to call for the records in connection with the complaint in S.T.C.Nos.46, 47 and 48 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District and quash the same.
For Petitioner in all Crl.O.Ps., : Mr.R.Russel Raj
COMMON ORDER
These petitions have been filed to quash the proceedings in S.T.C.Nos.46, 47 and 48 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
2.The learned counsel for the petitioner has raised several grounds in order to justify the quashing of the complaint filed by the respondent.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the cheques that were taken as security, were misused by the respondent. This was also admitted by the respondent before the respondent police when a complaint was given before the respondent police by the petitioner.
4.All the grounds that have been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner are factual in nature. This Court in exercise of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., cannot appreciate these facts since it falls within the realm of "appreciation of evidence". The Court below has to independently consider the facts
2
in the course of proceedings and decide the case in accordance with law. This Court does not deem it fit to interfere with the proceedings at this stage.
5.Accordingly, these criminal original petitions are dismissed. The presence of the petitioner shall be dispensed with and he shall be represented by a counsel before the Court below. The petitioner shall be present before the Court below only at the time of questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C., and at the time of passing of the judgment.
6.The learned counsel representing the petitioner shall cross examine the witnesses on the same day, when they are examined in chief and the petitioner shall not dispute the identity of the witnesses. The Court below is directed to complete the proceedings within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order and report before this Court after completion of the proceedings. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Sd/Assistant Registrar (T&P)
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar (CS-II)
To
The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
MM
TE/RSK/SAR-2 : 11/12/2018 : 2P/2C
CRL.O.P.(MD) Nos.11139, 11147 and 11149 of 2017 30.10.2018
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. where the grounds raised are purely factual and require appreciation of evidence.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
V.Sam Robinson
C.Kolappa Pillai
N.Anand Venkatesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
