Back
SANJAY KUMAR, K. VINOD CHANDRAN
Alok Singh Niranjan – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
ORDER :
Leave granted.
2. The High Court, by a lengthy judgment with copious extracts from the decisions of this Court, quashed a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, the NI Act), filed by the appellant against the second respondent. The primary ground on which the complaint was quashed was that the complainant failed to disclose the lawyer-client relationship between the second respondent and the appellant and there were also multiple grounds on the falsity of the claim raised in the complaint, which we cannot but observe at the outset, was not possible without analysis of the evidence; which has not even been led as of now.
3. We heard Mr. Pashupati Nath Razdan, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Arup Banerjee, learned counsel for the second respondent, who is an Advocate and also the learned State counsel.
4. The allegation in the complaint filed by the appellant herein was that the second respondent had requested a loan from the appellant in the year 2016 for purchase of a land. The complainant is stated to have made a loan of Rs.12.2 lakhs on 02.10.2016 in the presence of certain witnesses. Though, the loan amount was promise
Dishonour of cheque – Complaint cannot be quashed by High Court on mere presumptions.
Quashing of FIR is an exception rather than an ordinary rule, and the High Court should exercise the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C sparingly with circumspection.
Dishonour of cheques – Supreme Court is not the appropriate forum to resolve factual disputes – Parties may pursue their remedy before Civil Court.
Dishonour of cheque – Consequences of scuttling criminal process at a pre-trial stage can be grave and irreparable.
Dishonour of cheque – In exceptional circumstances, Court may take notice of attending circumstances to conclude that continuance of proceedings would amount to abuse of process of Court, or where qu....
Dishonour of cheque – Question regarding time barred nature of an underlying debt or liability in proceedings under Section 138 of NI Act is a mixed question of law and fact which ought not to be dec....
Point of Law : Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that, Section 139 of N.I. Act, includes a presumption that there exists a legally enforceable debt or liability, which is a rebuttal one.
Section 482 of Cr.P.C; can be exercised only for the purpose either to protect the interest of justice or to save the abuse of process of law.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
