Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.Vijayakumar, J
S.Karthigayini – Appellant
Versus
V.Saravanakumar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the petition seeking to quash criminal proceedings based on lack of transaction. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. evidentiary disputes concerning check misuse are inappropriate for determination in a quashing application. (Para 3) |
ORDER
The present petition has been filed by the accused person in S.T.C.No.
1791 of 2026, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Dindigul, seeking to quash the private complaint initiated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
2. According to the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, the cheque was initially issued by the petitioner only in favour of one Dhanapalan who had misused the said cheque and given it to the present complainant. He further submits that he has no transaction whatsoever with the present complainant.
3. The submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would make it clear that it is a defence taken by the petitioner in the summary trial proceedings. This defence cannot be a ground for quashing of the private complaint lodged under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It requires oral and documentary evidence to establish whether the cheque was initially issued in
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
