9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Quashing of proceedings under Sections 138/141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 2. Compliance with Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for accused residing outside the territorial jurisdiction. 3. Examination of the prima facie case and issuance of process by the Magistrate. Detailed Analysis: Quashing of Proceedings under Sections 138/141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act The petitioner sought to quash the proceedings of C.R. Case No. 400 of 2007 pending before the 1st Court of Judicial Magistrate, Jalpaiguri, under Sections 138/141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complaint arose from a business transaction where the accused issued a post-dated cheque for Rs. 3,94,000, which bounced due to insufficient funds and later because the account was closed. The complainant issued a demand notice, which the accused failed to comply with, leading to the initiation of the criminal case. Compliance with Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure The primary legal contention was whether the Magistrate could issue process against an accused residing outside its territorial jurisdiction without complying with the amended Section 202 of the Cr. PC. The amendment, effective from 23rd June 2006, mandates that the Magistrate must postpone the issuance of process and either inquire into the case himself or direct an investigation if the accused resides beyond the Court's jurisdiction. The petitioner argued that the Magistrate failed to comply with this requirement, rendering the proceedings legally unsustainable. Examination of the Prima Facie Case and Issuance of Process by the Magistrate The Magistrate initially took cognizance of the complaint, examined the complainant under Section 200 of the Cr. PC, and found a prima facie case under Sections 138/141 of the N.I. Act. The Court issued process against the accused persons, including the petitioner, who later sought to quash the proceedings on the grounds of non-compliance with Section 202. The Court examined various judicial precedents, including decisions from the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Orissa High Court, and Madras High Court, which provided differing interpretations of the necessity of an inquiry under Section 202 in cases involving Section 138 of the N.I. Act. Some judgments emphasized the mandatory nature of the inquiry for accused residing outside the jurisdiction, while others opined that such an inquiry might not be necessary if the complaint and accompanying documents prima facie established the offence. The Court also considered the legislative intent behind the amendment to Section 202, which aimed to prevent harassment of innocent persons by requiring an inquiry or investigation before summoning accused persons residing outside the Magistrate's jurisdiction. Conclusion The Court concluded that while the amendment to Section 202 aimed to protect individuals from vexatious litigation, it should not be interpreted in a manner that hinders the administration of justice. The Court held that if a Magistrate is prima facie satisfied with the existence of an offence, they can proceed from Section 200 to 204 of the Cr. PC without mandatorily passing through Section 202. The Court dismissed the petitions seeking to quash the proceedings and directed the Magistrate to proceed with the cases in accordance with the law and the observations made in the judgment.
|
