Dismissed

Ms.S.Seethalakshmi, v. Mr.Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay Lal

Madras HC2 Dec 2021CRL OP/29188/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an quashing petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. regarding a cheque dishonour complaint, the High Court dismissed the plea to quash the proceedings as factual issues remain triable. The Court directed the petitioner to obtain bail under Section 436 Cr.P.C. before the trial.

What did the court decide?

Petition to quash dismissed; Petitioner directed to apply for bail under Section 436 Cr.P.C. within two weeks.

Ms.S.Seethalakshmi, Vs Mr.Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay Lal — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated 02.12.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

¶5

Crl. O.P. No. 29188 of 2017 and Crl.M.P.No.16503 of 2017

¶6

S.Seethalakshmi

¶7

...Petitioner/Accused

¶8

Versus

¶9

Sanjay Kumar(alias) Sanjay Lal wani Represented by his Power Agent Prakash Chand Jain ...Respondent/Complainant

¶10

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for the records pertaining in C.C.No.1186 of 2017, pending on the file of the IV Fast Track Court, George Town, Chennai and quash the same.

¶11

For Petitioner:No appearance For Respondent:No appearance

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.1186 of 2016, pending on the file of the IV Fast Track Court, George Town, Chennai.

¶14

2.Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, there was no representation either on behalf of the petitioner or respondent.

¶15

3.The petitioner is charged with an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Having gone through the materials available on record, this Court is of the considered view that, when a complaint is filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, this Court cannot go into the question of fact as to the validity of the issuance of cheque and whether the cheque has been issued towards a legally enforceable debt or not. Those issues are factual and triable issues, which have to be decided only by way of a full fledged

¶16

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

trial and not otherwise under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. The above view of this Court is fortified by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS Vs. BHAJANLAL AND OTHERS 1992 Supp (1) Supreme Court Cases 335, wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection.

¶18

4.In such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that, quashing of the case cannot be considered at this point of time. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶19

5.It is for the petitioners to take all her defence before the trial Court. The petitioner/accused is directed to appear before the trial Court within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and file an application under Section 436 of Code of Criminal Procedure. On such filing of the application, the trial Court is directed to release the petitioner on bail on the same day on she executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) each with two sureties. If thereafter, she absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

s/d-

Assistant Registrar

//True Copy//

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶24

psa/mkn To

¶25

1.The Metropolitan Magistrate, IV Fast Track Court, George Town, Chennai.