2024 (12) TMI 1012 - HC - Indian Laws

Petition to quash Section 138 proceedings dismissed despite pending civil suit over defective equipment delivery

M/s. G.O.B. Enterprise and Anr. Sri Chakra Dhar Das Versus Progressive Motors

M/s. G.O.B. Enterprise and Anr. Sri Chakra Dhar Das Versus Progressive Motors - 2024:GAU - AS:12870 Issues:Challenge to order taking cognizance under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and dismissal of petition seeking quashment of the proceedings.Analysis:1. Lack of Disclosure of Legally Enforceable Due:The petitioner argued that the complainant did not disclose the actual amount of legally enforceable debt, making it unclear if a case under Section 138 of NI Act is established. The petitioner contended that details regarding the total sale consideration, payments made, and the remaining amount were not provided, challenging the basis of the complaint.2. Multiple Cheques and Lack of Specific Liability:The case involved 11 cheques, and the petitioner highlighted the ambiguity in identifying which cheque corresponded to what liability. The petitioner emphasized the absence of clarity regarding the due amount against each machine, raising doubts about the legal basis for the complaint.3. Legal Presumptions and Burden of Proof:The respondent argued that the complaint clearly outlined the purchase of equipment, issuance of cheques against a legally enforceable debt, and subsequent dishonor. Referring to Section 139 of the NI Act, the respondent emphasized the presumption of discharge of liability through the cheques, placing the burden on the accused to rebut this presumption with conclusive or circumstantial evidence.4. Judicial Interpretation and Defense Mechanisms:The court acknowledged the essential conditions under Section 138 of the NI Act and the significance of the presumption under Section 139. It highlighted that the accused could challenge the complaint's factual assertions through evidence and defenses under Section 313 Cr.P.C., including aspects like pending civil cases and alleged deficiencies in goods delivered.5. Court's Discretion and Abuse of Process:The court clarified that the power to quash proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is exercised in cases of abuse of court process, malice, absurd allegations, or lack of offense commission. In this case, the court found the complaint sufficiently established the factual foundation for invoking Section 138 of the NI Act, dismissing the petition for lack of merit.Conclusion:The court ruled against quashing the proceedings, emphasizing the sufficiency of the complaint's details to support the Section 138 case. It directed the Magistrate to continue with the case, highlighting that its observations were specific to this case and should not influence the trial court's decision.