Curable defect in complainant's name cannot justify quashing NI Act complaints when no prejudice is shown.

A criminal complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act is not liable to be quashed under Section 482 CrPC merely because it was filed in the complainant company's former name after a change of name. The Delhi High Court held that such a defect is formal and curable by amendment, as it does not alter the substance of the transaction, the company's rights, or the accused's defence, especially where no concrete prejudice is shown. Inherent quashing power at the summoning stage must be used sparingly, particularly at a pre-trial stage. The petitions were rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether criminal complaints under the Negotiable Instruments Act could be quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 solely because they were filed in the complainant company's old name after its name had been changed, and whether such a defect was curable.

Analysis: The Court held that the inherent power to quash proceedings at the summoning stage must be exercised sparingly, particularly where the matter is still at a pre-trial stage and the accused can raise defences before the trial court. A mere change in the complainant company's name did not affect the substance of the complaints, the underlying transaction, or the rights of the company. The filing of the complaints in the former name was treated as a formal or technical infirmity capable of being corrected by amendment, especially since no cogent prejudice to the petitioners was shown. The Court also distinguished authority dealing with substantial amendments and accepted that the pending defects had been taken steps to be cured.

Conclusion: The defect in naming the complainant company was held to be curable and not a ground for quashing the complaints; the petitions were rejected.

---