Section 482 CrPC cannot be used to quash cheating complaints where civil disputes and cheque proceedings also exist.

At the stage of Section 482 CrPC, the High Court cannot resolve disputed facts, reject pleaded documents, or finally determine whether a contract was novated. Where the complaint alleges ownership misrepresentation, receipt of advance, sale of some of the land, and inability to perform the promised transfer, allegations of cheating, fraud, or criminal conspiracy cannot be quashed merely because civil disputes and cheque-recovery proceedings are also pending. The Court held that the truth of the accusations and the legal character of the transaction required trial. The quashing order was set aside and the criminal complaints were restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in quashing the criminal complaints and proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on the ground that the dispute was civil in nature, the contract had been novated, and related civil and cheque-recovery proceedings were pending.

Analysis: The complaint allegations disclosed that the accused had allegedly represented ownership and availability of land, received a substantial advance, and were said to have sold some of the very lands earlier or otherwise been unable to perform the promised transfer. The Court held that, at the stage of exercising inherent powers, it is impermissible to enter into disputed questions of fact, disbelieve the pleaded schedules, or finally determine whether there had been novation of contract. It further held that the mere existence of civil proceedings or proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 does not bar criminal prosecution where cheating, fraud, or criminal conspiracy are specifically alleged. The question whether the allegations ultimately make out the offences required trial and could not be decided in a quashing proceeding.

Conclusion: The High Court was not justified in quashing the complaints and proceedings; the criminal appeals were allowed and the quashing order was set aside.

---