Cheque dishonour complaints: disputed resignation of a director is ordinarily a trial issue, not a ground for quashing at threshold.

A challenge to a cheque dishonour complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, based on a director's alleged resignation before the offence and the absence of specific averments about his role, was held to raise factual questions that could not be decided under Section 482 CrPC. The court treated the resignation documents, company records, and the applicability of Section 141 NI Act as matters requiring evidence at trial. The defence that the accused was no longer in control of the company was therefore not a ground for quashing at the threshold unless the complaint was patently unsustainable. The quashing petition was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 could be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on the ground that the petitioner had resigned as director before the alleged offence and no specific averments were made regarding his role in the company's affairs.

Analysis: The complaint alleged dishonour of cheque issued by the company and sought to fasten liability on the petitioner as an accused in his capacity as a former director. The Court noted that the petitioner's reliance on resignation documents and corporate records raised factual questions as to the date of resignation, the status reflected in the company records, and the applicability of Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Such questions required examination of evidence and could not be conclusively determined in proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Court treated the petitioner's contention as a defence available at trial, not as a ground for quashing at the threshold.

Conclusion: The petition for quashing was not maintainable on these facts and the challenge to the complaint failed.

Ratio Decidendi: A claim that an accused director had resigned before the alleged offence, or that the complaint lacks sufficient particulars regarding his role, is ordinarily a matter for trial and not a ground for quashing criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 unless the complaint itself is patently unsustainable.

---