Dishonoring postdated cheques does not automatically constitute a criminal offense under IPC sections 406 or 420, without evidence of fraudulent intention at issuance.

1. There is a petition u / S. 482, Cr. P.C. to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 400 of 1988 on the file of the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nellore.

2. The facts relevant for decision of this criminal petition are : The petitioner is the proprietor of Laxmi Wines, Anantapur. He had dealings with Sreenivasa Wine, Nellore (R.2 Sreenivasa Wines is the distributor of Macdowell liquors for various liquor shops and retail vendors. Sreenivasa Wines was dealing with Lakshmi Wines. Subsequently some disputes arose regarding the liquor supplied to Siddardha liquors, Anantapur. In this connection the petitioner filed a suit O.S. No. 8 of 1988 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Anantapur. In that suit apart from the partners of the Siddardha Liquors, Sreenivasa Wines and its managing partners were later impleaded as defendants 9 and 10. After the filing of that suit in connection with the business transactions and for supply of goods during 1985-86 the petitioner issued ten postdated cheques, the details of which are mentioned in para 4 of the Criminal petition. It is stated that these cheques issued on the Bank of Baroda were dishonoured. The petitioner claims he paid the entire amount by way of demand draft and Telegraph Transfers. On the ground that these cheques were dishonoured, R. 2 gave a complaint to the police and ultimately C.C. No. 400 of 1988 on the file of the II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate was filed for offences under S.406 and S.420, IPC. In fact, no amounts were due from the petitioner to the second respondent. On the other hand the second respondent is liable to refund an amount of Rs.4, 35,784-35. This is the amount lying with R - 2 to credit of the petitioner. To recover that amount, the petitioner filed O.S. No. l14 of 1989 on the file of the subordinate Judg's Court. This is the amount due with interest as on 16-5-1986. The two suits are now pending on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Anantapur. In such a background, the complainant filed a false criminal case with false allegations on the basis of the ten postdated cheques the amount of which was realised long ago. This criminal case has been filed only as a counter - blast to the civil suits and for evading payment of the amounts due to the petitioner. Assuming everything in favour of the second respondent, there are absolutely no allegations to the effect at the time of issuing the cheques, the petitioner had, any intention of cheating or defrauding R - 2. The fact of realisation of the amount covered by the cheques was suppressed. The complaint and the charge sheet do not disclose that the cheques were issued with any dishonest intention and that at the time of issuing the cheques, the petitioner was fully aware that there were no funds to his credit in the account nor are there allegations to the effect that he had no intention to pay, in these circumstances, the proceedings in C.C. No. 400 of 1988 are liable to be quashed. There is no offence made out to satisfy the ingredients of S. 420, IPC or S. 406, IPC. If the prosecution is not quashed, it would amount to abuse of process of the Court, causing injustice and prejudice to the petitioner.

3. Various allegations are also made in the petition to indicate that R - 2 being a very powerful party at Nellore is trying to harass the petitioner and that no senior advocate at Nellore is prepared to file vakalat for the petitioner and in such circumstances, the criminal case should also be transferred to the Subordinate Judge's Court at Anantapur, so that the two su