M L SONDHI Vs. R BIDHI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has approached this Court under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the criminal proceedings pending against him in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, Nahan, on a complaint filed against him and others by respondent No. 1 under Sections 417,420 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code.

(2.) THE sole contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is that the allegations made, in the complaint filed by respondent No. 1 even if taken at their face value would Dot disclose the commission of any offence much less the offence of the type mentioned therein against the petitioner and hence the continuation of such proceedings against him is only an abuse of the process of the Court. In support of this contention the learned counsel for the petitioner carried me through the contents of the complaint filed by respondent No. 1 against him. On going through the allegations made in the complaint, I find that there is every substance in the contention inasmuch as the complaint on the face of it does not show the commission of any offence on the part of the petitioner. THE short allegations made in the complaint are that the complainant-respondent No. 1 bad invested some amount with the petitioner in fixed deposit. This investment was made voluntarily and there is no allegations if she was induced by the petitioner in making that investment. THE further case of the complainant respondent No. 1 is that on maturity of the fixed deposit, respondent No. 1 issued her a cheque for the due amount which on presentation was dishonoured by the bank. THE issu of a cheque which on presentation was dishonoured would not by itself constitute an offence, Issue of a checque at the most means a promise or representation on the part of the drawer of the cheque that the cheque on presentation shall be honoured. In case it is not so honoured, it would only amount to a breach of promise on the part of the drawer of the cheque. In order to bring the case within the mischief of sections 417/420 Indian Penal Code the complainant has inter-alia to allege that petitioner had by deceiving her fradulently or dishonestly induced her to deliver any property to any person or to consent that any person shall retain any property or had intentionally induced her to do or omit to do anything which she would not do or omit if she was not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to her in body, mind, reputation or property. No such allegations are found in the complaint filed by respondent No. 1. THE proceedings initiated against the petitioner on the basis of such a complaint are obviously without jurisdiction and abuse of process of the law. THE same are accordingly quashed. Petition allowed.