9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (2) TMI 744 - HC - Indian LawsDishonor of Cheque - non-payment against one dishonoured cheque for the amount of ₹ 65,00,000/- issued by petitioner in favour of the respondent company - section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 read with Section 420 IPC - HELD THAT - Upon analyzing the provisions of the NI Act, it is clear that Section 138 of the Act spells out the ingredients of the offence as well as the conditions required to be fulfilled before initiating the prosecution - These ingredients and conditions are to be satisfied mainly on the basis of documentary evidence, keeping in mind the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act and Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 as well as the provisions of Section 146 of the Act. This Court does not find any material on record which can be stated to be of sterling and impeccable quality warranting invocation of the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.PC at this stage. More so, the defence as raised by the petitioners in the petition requires evidence, which cannot be appreciated, evaluated or adjudged in the proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.PC and the same can only be proved in the Court of law. There are no no flaw or infirmity in the proceedings pending before the Trial Court. However, the Trial Court shall certainly consider and deal with the contentions and the defence of the petitioner in accordance with law - petition dismissed - decided against petitioner.
Issues:
1. Quashing of summon under Section 138 of the NI Act 2. Jurisdiction of High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 3. Defence raised by the petitioner 4. Special provisions for trial under the NI Act Analysis: Issue 1: The petitioner sought to quash the summon dated 19.08.2019 under Section 138 of the NI Act. The respondent had filed a complaint against the petitioner for non-payment against a dishonoured cheque. The petitioner argued that there were no dues as the respondent had received the entire amount. However, the court emphasized that the accused must raise their defence before the Metropolitan Magistrate and follow the due procedure under the NI Act and Cr.PC. The High Court cannot entertain a plea of the accused regarding why they should not be tried under Section 138 of the NI Act. Issue 2: The High Court's jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was discussed. The court highlighted that while the provision has a wide scope, caution is necessary in its exercise. The court stated that the defence raised by the petitioner requires evidence that can only be proved in a court of law, not in proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Citing a Supreme Court case, the court emphasized that Section 482 cannot be used when allegations need to be proven in a court of law. The court found no flaw in the proceedings before the Trial Court and dismissed the petition. Issue 3: The defence raised by the petitioner was analyzed. The court explained that the accused must take the plea of defence and prove it in court. The burden of proving defences such as lack of consideration or being a sleeping partner lies on the accused. The court highlighted that the accused can lead defence evidence through affidavits and documents under the summary trial provisions of the NI Act. Issue 4: The judgment delved into the special provisions for trial under the NI Act. Sections 142 to 147 provide a special code for the trial of offences under Chapter XVII of the NI Act. These provisions aim to expedite trials and depart from the regular criminal trial processes to ensure expeditious proceedings without compromising the accused's right to a fair trial. The court emphasized that the Trial Court should consider and address the contentions and defence of the petitioner in accordance with the law. In conclusion, the High Court upheld the Trial Court's proceedings, emphasizing the importance of following due procedure, raising defences before the Metropolitan Magistrate, and proving defences in a court of law. The judgment highlighted the special provisions for trial under the NI Act and the limitations of invoking the High Court's jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
|
