Counterblast criminal complaint can be quashed where the facts show retaliatory prosecution and abuse of process.

A criminal complaint may be quashed at the threshold where the surrounding facts show it was filed as a counterblast to earlier proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act and continuation would amount to abuse of the process of court. The relevant inquiry is whether the later prosecution was instituted in retaliation against, or to pre-empt, the pending earlier case. On those facts, the Court treated the complaint as retaliatory in nature and quashed the proceedings.

---

---

Issues: Whether the criminal complaint and the proceedings arising therefrom were liable to be quashed as an abuse of the process of court on the ground that they were a counterblast to the complainant's earlier prosecution under the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Analysis: The complaint case arose after the earlier prosecution under the Negotiable Instruments Act and the surrounding circumstances were examined to determine whether the later proceeding had been instituted to retaliate against or pre-empt the earlier case. The Court relied on the principle that where the attendant facts indicate that a criminal complaint has been lodged as a counterblast to pending proceedings and continuation of such prosecution would amount to abuse of the process of court, interference is justified at the threshold.

Conclusion: The proceedings were held to be an abuse of the process of court and were quashed in favour of the petitioners.

---