The main legal point established in the judgment is that allegations raised by the petitioner as a plea of defense should be addressed before the trial court and cannot be the basis for quashing the complaint.

The accused in C.C.No.46/2007 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Vellore has come forward with the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing the above said criminal proceedings.

2. The submissions made by Mr. J. Kathiresan, learned counsel for the petitioner were heard. The petition and the documents produced along with the petition were also perused.

.3. The above said case, namely C.C.No.46/2007 was instituted on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Vellore against the petitioner herein based on the complaint of the respondent herein preferred under Section 200 Cr.P.C for an alleged offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

4. The petitioner has come forward with the present petition for quashing the above said criminal proceedings initiated against her on the ground that the complaint itself is an abuse of process of court. It is the contention of the petitioner that the respondent herein, as a client of the petitioner, used to visit petitioners house regularly; that the petitioners husband is running a primary school; that her cheque book and the school documents were missing from 22.09.2006 and she preferred a complaint on the file of Pallikonda Police Station, Vellore district informing the same to the police; that after investigation, she was issued a not traceable certificate on 30.09.2006; that thereafter she received a lawyers notice on behalf of the respondent herein, as if she had given a cheque for a sum of Rs.50,000/- and the same was dishonoured when presented for encashment and that only thereafter she came to know that the cheque book and the school documents would have been stolen by the respondent herein. It is the further contention of the petitioner that though a not-traceable certificate was issued on 30.09.2006 itself, she again preferred a complaint against the respondent herein and her husband Palani for the theft of the cheque book and school documents; that she had to approach this court by way of a petition in Crl.O.P.No.7525/2007 to get an order on 20.03.2007 directing the police to register a case and investigate the same in accordance with law and that only pursuant to the said direction, a case was registered against the respondent herein and her husband in Cr.No.134 of 2007 on the file of Pallikonda Police Station. It is the further contention of the petitioner that one of the cheque leaves detached from the cheque book stolen by the respondent was filled up, presented for collection and a case has been instituted after complying with the formalities of instituting a private complaint for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. According to the petitioner the complaint is nothing but an abuse of process of court.

.5. This court, upon hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner in respect of the above said contentions raised by the petitioner in this petition and after perusing the petition and the documents filed along with the petition in the form of a typed set of papers, comes to the conclusion that all the allegations made by the petitioner in the petition can be raised as plea of defence before the trial court and that they cannot be the grounds on which the complaint itself can be put to death at the threshold, as they touch the merits of the case. No procedural irregularity has been alleged in the petition.

6. It is not in dispute that the cheque in question pertains to the account maintained by the petitioner in her bank. It is also not in dispute that the cheque contains her signature. It is also not in dispute that the said cheque, when presented for encashment was returned unpaid with a dishonour note "funds insufficient". Statutory notice was also given within the time prescribed by the statute. The complaint has been preferred after a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of statutory notice received by the petition