MADHUMITA KAUR Vs. ZILE SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner invokes the inherent powers of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) for quashing of a Complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (the Act) filed by Respondent No.2 for dishonour of the cheque for Rs. 9,70,000/-.

(2.) The Petitioner's plea is that apart from the fact that cheque was issued only towards delivery of a Tata Safari car and since it was actually delivered, the cheque was required to be returned by Respondent No.2; on admitted averments, the cheque delivered to Respondent No.2 in Lucknow, was drawn at ICICI Bank Limited, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow. Thus, mere presentation of the cheque at the Delhi Bank would not confer any jurisdiction at Delhi Courts. Reliance is placed on a judgment of the Supreme Court in Shri Ishar Alloy Steels Ltd. v. Jayaswals Neco Ltd., 2001 3 SCC 609.

(3.) It is well settled that for the purpose of quashing of a Complaint or FIR, the High Court cannot look into the defence of the accused. The Court is only required to see whether on the basis of the averments and the evidence produced by the Complainant, prima facie, there are grounds for proceeding against the accused.