Quashment in cheque dishonour cases cannot rest on disputed documents or factual objections at the threshold.

A criminal complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act was not quashed in exercise of inherent powers because the complaint contained specific allegations and relied on documents said to show admission of liability and an undertaking to pay. The Court held that the truth, genuineness, and admissibility of those documents could not be examined at the quash stage and had to be tested at trial. The petitioners' objections that they were not signatories and had no role in the transaction raised factual disputes unsuitable for determination under Section 482, so the complaint was allowed to proceed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was liable to be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the ground that the petitioners were not signatories to the cheque and the documents relied on by the complainant were disputed.

Analysis: The complaint contained specific allegations against the accused and relied upon documents said to show admission of liability and an undertaking to pay. The Court held that the truth, genuineness, and admissibility of those documents could not be decided in a petition for quash and had to be tested by the trial court. The petitioners' contention that they were not signatories and had no role in the transaction raised factual issues unsuitable for determination at the threshold under Section 482.

Conclusion: The complaint was not liable to be quashed; the petition was rejected and dismissed, leaving the petitioners free to raise all factual and evidentiary objections before the trial court.

---