ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.73 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Thiruchirapalli.

2. The facts of the case is that the respondent in this case is the dealer of the petitioner from 2007 onwards for the purpose of selling the sewing machines manufactured by the petitioner company and in the course of the transaction the respondent issued cheques towards the discharge of the liability and those two cheques viz cheque no 674544 for a sum of Rs.3,03,090/- and cheque no 674556 for a sumof Rs.1,53,780 and were presented for payment by the petitioner for encashment on the dates mentioned in the complaint filed by the petitioner against the respondent and were dishonoured. Because of that dishonour in spite of the issue of notice the respondent did not come forward to pay the amount or discharge the liability so STC no 214 of 2011 and STC number 205 of 2011 were filed by the petitioner before the jurisdictional judicial magistrate court. On the receipt of the summons filed a private complaint before the Trial court stating that the cheques were not issued by the respondent towards any liability but even as per the statement of accounts presented by the petitioner these two cheques were accounted for. As per the business agreement between the parties, on the credit basis, the respondent used to issue cheques and those cheques even after proper accounting have been mis-utilised by the petitioner and thereby the petitioner has committed offences punishable under sections 120 B, 199, 406 and 467 Indian penal code. On the basis of the complaint, the trial court took cognizance of the offence and so petition is filed by the petitioner to quash the private complaint mainly on the ground that the issue of the cheques were not denied and disputed by the respondent and there was a legally enforceable liability and as such no offences are attracted and so the case before the trial court is abuse of the process of the court and it is liable to be quashed. 3. The Question which arises for consideration is whether the private Compliant filed by the respondent is purely an abuse of the process of the court or conversely whether the ingredients of the offences mentioned in the complaint are attracted warranting cognizance of the offences against the petitioner.

4. Even though this court should not to take into the factual aspects while deciding the petition filed under section 482 criminal procedure code, facts narrated in the complaint filed by the respondent, must also be taken into account, for the purpose of deciding the dispute.

5. The fact that the respondent and the petitioner were engaged in business transaction by which the respondent was acting as a dealer for the selling the sewing machines is not denied and disputed. It is also not denied that for the purpose of the transaction credit facility was extended to the respondent by the petitioner.

6. As per the documents produced by the respondent before the trial court it is seen that notice was issued by the respondent in reply to the notice issued by the petitioner over the dishonour of the disputed cheques. In reply it has been categorically admitted by the respondent to the effect that as per the agreement, the respondent used to issue blank signed cheques in favour of the petitioner whenever the goods were supplied to him on credit basis. When the amount is paid it would be accounted. So according to the respondent this practice was going on between the parties and in due course of time some sort of dispute arose, as a result of which, the business transaction ended and the petitioner also directed the respondent to vacate premises where he was carrying on business. Those facts are irrelevant for our consideration. Now, according to the respondent, the cheques, which were issued towards discharge of the amount has been mis-utilised by the petitioner when dispute arose between them, by filling up the same with ex