IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that a complaint can only be quashed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C if it does not disclose a prima facie case or is filed with mala fide intent, and that personal grievances alone do not suffice to invalidate a legal complaint.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. B. J. Mukherjee, learned counsel for the petitioner. And also heard Mr. S. C. Biswas, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This is an application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C for quashing the Complaint Case No. 19 of 2021 pending before the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bongaigaon.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the opposite party herein i.e., the husband of the petitioner No. 1, expressed that he was in urgent need of money for his business purpose and then he proposed to sell his plot of land to the petitioner No. 2, i.e., his mother-in-law. Accordingly, the petitioner No. 2 purchased the plot of land measuring 1(one) Katha 5 Lecha covered by Dag No. 11 (Pt.) of Patta No. 633 situated in village Salbari, Bongaigaon for a total consideration of Rs. 7,50,000/-(Rupees Seven lakh fifty thousand) and a sale deed is also executed on 19.02.2018.

4. Even after receiving the money against the sale of the plot of land, the respondent had approached the petitioner No. 2 asking for some more financial help for his business. The petitioner No. 2 being the mother-in-law of the opposite party/complainant, arranged an amount of Rs. 20,00,000/-(Rupees Twenty lakh) by accumulating all her sources and mortgaging the property, the said 20,00,000/-(Rupees Twenty lakh) was given to the respondent for a period of 2(two) years and the respondent accordingly issued 2(two) cheques, one bearing No. 197245 dated 22.05.2021 and another bearing No. 197246 wherein dated 28.05.2021. The 2(two) cheques were issued of Rs. 10,00,000/-(Ten lakh) each.

Xxx

6. Thereafter, the opposite party again approached the petitioner No. 2 for further financial help and then the petitioner No. 2 refused to pay any further money and asked him to refund the money already taken by him. On which the respondent became furious and started torturing the petitioner No. 1 and asked her to bring money from her mother. When the torture on the petitioner No. 1 became unbearable, she lodged an FIR against the respondent on 25.04.2021 under Sections 498A 294 447 354(B) 307 323 IPC and the respondent was also arrested in connection with the same case.

7. But the respondent in spite of lapse of 2(two) years did not pay any single penny to the petitioner No. 2 and the cheques which were given by the respondent is also dishonored by the bank on 05.08.2021 on presentation of the cheques and thereafter, the petitioner No. 2 also served legal notice to the respondent on 23.08.2021 which was duly delivered to him on 26.08.2021. After receiving the said notice under the N.I Act, the respondent lodged a complaint on 03.09.2021 against the petitioners under Section 406/294/420/506 IPC alleging inter-alia that the petitioner No. 1 had taken 5(five) Nos. of blank signed cheques from his cheque book and those were presented before the bank for encashment. The said complaint was accordingly registered as Complaint Case No. 19/2021 which is pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bongaigaon.

8. The petitioner No. 2 thereafter filed a case under Section 138 of N.I Act against the present respondent on 20.09.2021 after expiry of the mandatory period which is registered as N.I Case No. 79/2021. It is further stated that the respondent on the other hand, filed a Money Suit being Money Suit No. 36/2021 against the petitioner No. 2 for the alleged amount of Rs 8,50,000/-(Rupees Eight lakh fifty thousand) which has also been pleaded in his complaint case.

9. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondent filed the complaint case only with an intention to harass the petitioners and he is trying to escape from his liability to pay the loan amount to protect himself from the case filed under N.I Act. And as such, the complaint filed by the respondent is false and concocted one which was filed only after receiving the demand notice after dishonor of cheques. The respondent did not take any steps