Back
SUBHENDU SAMANTA
Blue Ice Construction – Appellant
Versus
Blue Star Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Subhendu Samanta, J.
1. This is an application u/s 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing a criminal complaint case No. being 6602 of 2017 pending before the Learned 20th Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta alleging the offence punishable u/s 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instrument Act 1881.
2. The brief fact of the petitioner before this court is that the petitioner and OPs had business relations since last 10 years. Petitioners provided services to the complainant for their various contracts and project jobs. Time to time petitioner has been awarded that numerous job works for supply, installation, testing and commissioning their components. The petitioner has been diligently and honestly providing its service and facilities to the complainant all along accordingly from time to time. Petitioner raised multiple bills/invoices for such services upon the complainant.
3. It is the further case of the petitioner that, initially the complainant made payments regularly against the bills, but past few years the complainant are not making regular payments to the petitioner as per his requirement.
4. It is the further case of the petitio
The High Court cannot resolve factual disputes in a quashing petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as such matters must be determined by the trial court.
The issuance of a cheque implies liability under the NI Act, and courts should not quash complaints based on disputed facts without trial.
Dishonour of cheque – Consequences of scuttling criminal process at a pre-trial stage can be grave and irreparable.
(1) Dishonour of cheques – Legal presumption of cheque having been issued in discharge of liability must also receive due weightage.(2) To non-suit complainant, at the stage of summoning order, when ....
The court held that a cheque issued as security does not invalidate a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and factual disputes must be settled at trial.
The court reaffirmed that the presumption of liability under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act must be established through evidence at trial, not pre-trial.
A mere breach of contract does not constitute criminal liability under IPC unless fraudulent intent is established at the time of inducement.
The court reiterated that issues around cheque liability under Section 138 NI Act must be decided at trial, underscoring the necessity for allegations in complaints to be accepted as true at the quas....
The court emphasized that the determination of whether a cheque was issued for a legally enforceable debt or as security is a factual issue for trial.
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
