Quashing of cheque dishonour proceedings against directors turns on resignation proved by an unimpeachable public document.

In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against company directors, a complaint with the basic Section 141 averment that they were active in the company's day-to-day affairs would ordinarily justify trial. However, the court accepted a certified Form 32 as an uncontroverted public document showing that the petitioners had resigned before the cheque was issued. As the resignation was decisive and of unquestionable authenticity at the prima facie stage, continuation of the proceedings was treated as an abuse of process. The criminal proceedings against the petitioners were therefore quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against directors of a company could be quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on the basis of a public document showing resignation prior to issuance of cheque, despite the complaint containing the basic averment required under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Analysis: The complaint contained the necessary basic averment that the petitioners were directors actively involved in the day-to-day affairs of the company, which ordinarily would be sufficient to proceed to trial. However, the certified copy of Form 32 was produced as a public document showing that the petitioners had resigned before the cheque was issued. In the light of the principles governing quashing, uncontroverted documents of unquestionable authenticity may be looked into at the prima facie stage where their effect is decisive. Since the resignation document showed that the petitioners were no longer directors at the relevant time, continuing the prosecution would amount to abuse of process.

Conclusion: The proceedings against the petitioners were liable to be quashed.

---