ORDER: T.Kalavathy, the petitioner herein, challenging the proceedings for the offence under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act initiated by Veera Exports, Karur, the respondent/ complainant, has filed this petition under Sec.482, Crl.P.C. seeking to quash the same.

2. Though several grounds have been raised by the counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that this petition has got to be allowed on a single and short ground.

3. The case of the complainant, the respondent herein is as follows:

"The accused having business dealing with the complainant firm issued the eight cheques bearing various dates from 9.4.1995 to 30.4.1995 to the tune of Rs.4,00,000 in favour of the complainant firm towards the discharge of liability. On 15.5.1995 the complainant presented all the cheques, but the same were returned unpaid. The complainant intimated the same to the accused, who in turn, assured the complainant that she would pay the cheque amount after a period of six months. In the month of January, 1996, the accused expressed her inability to pay the cheque amount and altered the year of the cheques in the cheques mentioned above as 1996 and made necessary endorsement therefor. She further requested to present the cheques after a period of three months. Accordingly, the cheques were presented on 18.7.1996. But, the same were returned on 26.7.1996 with the endorsement "payment stopped". Then, the complainant issued notice demanding the cheque amount within 15 days. But, the accused sent a reply stating that she did not voluntarily make those relevant corrections with regard to the year and she was compelled to put the endorsement in those cheques under threat and coercion after she was kidnapped. Since the cheque amounts were not paid, the complaint was filed."

4. The case of the accused/ petitioner is as follows:

"During the business dealings, there were a number of transactions. These eight cheques bearing the dates from 9.4.1995 to 30.4.1995 were issued by the petitioner, but the amounts of those cheques were already paid. Since there was a misunderstanding between the petitioner and the accused, when the petitioner and her husband were coming out of the Criminal Court at Karur on 12.7.1996, the persons attached to the complainant firm along with rowdy elements suddenly took them in an auto forcibly and confined in a room and beaten. At that time, the petitioner was threatened and coerced to make alterations in those cheques by striking the year 1995 and writing as 1996. After they were released out, the petitioner filed a police complaint to the Karur Police and the said complaint was registered in Crime No.964 of 1996 for offences under Secs.147, 342, 363 and 384, I.P.C. on 29.7.1996. Immediately thereafter, she also intimated the same to the Bank and requested them to stop the payment in regard to the cheques in question. In the meantime, the complainant firm presented the cheques on 18.7.1996 and the same was dishonoured on 26.7.1996. On receiving the notice dated 18.8.1996 from the complainant firm, the petitioner had given a detailed reply dated 23.8.1996 stating that the alterations were made not voluntarily but out of threat and coercion and with regard to that, police investigation is pending. Despite this, a complaint is filed. Since the said alterations were not made voluntarily, the complainant would not be entitled to file any complaint for the offence under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act."

5. According to the complainant, the year 1995 put in the cheques was altered into 1996. On the other hand, it is the case of the accused that the alterations were not made voluntarily. The question as to whether the alterations and the endorsement made by the petitioner out of threat and coercion cannot be decided by this Court, as it is a question of fact, more so when the police investigation is pending with reference to the offence of abduction and coercion. Therefore, the contention that the complaint is not main

Click Here to Read the rest of this document