Court quashes criminal case under Section 138, finding abuse of process. Discrepancies noted, presumption rebutted. Case closed.

The court quashed the criminal case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, finding that the petitioner had successfully demonstrated abuse of process of court. The court noted discrepancies in the complaint and supporting documents, concluding that the petitioner rebutted the presumption under Section 139 of the Act. As a result, the criminal proceedings were quashed, and the related case for specific performance of contract was closed.

---

---

Issues involved:
The judgment involves the issue of quashing a criminal case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act based on a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C alleging abuse of process of law and court.

Details of the Judgment:

Issue 1: Alleged offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act
The petitioner borrowed a sum of Rs. 2,20,000 from the respondent and issued a post-dated cheque for the same amount. The cheque was returned unpaid for insufficiency of funds, leading to the initiation of criminal proceedings. The petitioner contended that the cheque was filled up in the name of the respondent by another party, and a reply notice was promptly sent in response to the demand for payment.

Issue 2: Abuse of process of law and court
The petitioner argued that the transaction in question was part of a separate agreement for sale involving her son-in-law and father, and the respondent's brother. The petitioner claimed that the criminal case was an abuse of process of law and court, citing a related civil case for specific performance of contract. The respondent contended that the transactions were distinct and the petitioner was attempting to create confusion.

Judgment Analysis:
The court noted that while a complaint can be quashed if it does not make out the alleged offence, an exception exists if the initiation of proceedings is claimed to be an abuse of process of court. In this case, the court found discrepancies in the complaint and supporting documents, including an agreement for sale and statutory notices. The court concluded that the materials presented by the petitioner were sufficient to rebut the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and discharge the reverse burden of proof. As a result, the court quashed the criminal proceedings, determining that the petitioner had made out a clear case of abuse of process of court.

Conclusion:
The petition was allowed, and the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.120/2007 were quashed by the court, along with the closure of the connected MP.No.1 of 2009.

---