Petition to quash dishonor of cheque proceedings dismissed with Rs. 50,000 costs under Section 482 CrPC

Delhi HC dismissed a petition seeking quashing of dishonor of cheque proceedings under Section 482 CrPC. Petitioner admitted executing promissory note acknowledging debt and did not dispute issuing nine cheques or signatures thereon. Court held that disputed issues regarding authority letter execution, phraseology, and bank certification were questions of fact requiring trial adjudication, not suitable for Section 482 proceedings. Court found petition motivated to delay trial proceedings and dismissed it with costs of Rs. 50,000 payable to Delhi State Legal Services Committee within two weeks.

---

---

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the maintainability of a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the validity of an 'Authority Letter' issued by the wife of the complainant, the certification of bank memos, and the consolidation of multiple cheques in a single complaint.

Summary:

Issue 1: Maintainability of the complaint under Section 138 NIA
The petitioner sought setting aside and quashing of the complaint under Section 138 NIA filed by the respondent no. 2 against the petitioner and others. The petitioner argued that the complaint is not maintainable as the respondent no. 2 is neither the payee nor the holder in due course. The petitioner relied on legal precedents to support the contention.

Issue 2: Validity of the 'Authority Letter'
The petitioner challenged the validity of the 'Authority Letter' issued by the wife of the complainant in favor of the respondent no. 2. The petitioner disputed the execution and phraseology of the letter, contending that it does not support the filing of the complaint by the respondent no. 2 alone.

Issue 3: Certification of Bank Memos
The petitioner argued that the bank memo or slip cannot be considered as evidence as it is not certified by the bank as required under Section 146 NIA. The petitioner cited a previous court order to support this argument.

Issue 4: Consolidation of Multiple Cheques in a Single Complaint
The petitioner contended that a single complaint under Section 138 NIA for all nine dishonored cheques is not maintainable under Section 219 CrPC. The petitioner argued that the cheques cannot be clubbed together in one complaint. Legal precedents were cited in support of this argument.

The court noted that the petitioner did not dispute the execution of a Promissory Note or the issuance of the cheques. It was observed that the disputed questions of facts required trial and adjudication by the Trial Court, not the High Court at that stage. The court emphasized that it cannot conduct a mini trial and should not interfere with ongoing criminal proceedings at a nascent stage.

The court found that the petitioner had not demonstrated reasonable grounds to invoke its powers under Section 482 CrPC. The court dismissed the petition, imposed costs of Rs. 50,000 to be paid to the Delhi State Legal Services Committee, and directed proof of payment to be submitted to the learned Metropolitan Magistrate within two weeks.

---