Quashing under Section 482 CrPC is limited where loan-related cheating allegations raise disputed facts for trial.

In a quashing challenge under Section 482 CrPC, the Calcutta High Court reiterated that interference is limited to cases where the complaint discloses no prima facie offence or the proceedings are patently untenable. Where allegations concerned a loan transaction with dishonoured cheques, disputed repayments, and contested dishonest intention from the inception, the Court held that such factual disputes could not be resolved by a mini trial at the quashing stage. The questions whether payments were interest or part-repayment, and whether the matter was merely civil in nature, were treated as issues for evidence at trial. The complaint was therefore not confined to a simple failure to repay a loan.

---

---

Issues: Whether the criminal revision for quashing the complaint and consequent proceedings under Sections 406, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was maintainable under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 when the allegations arose from a loan transaction and the existence of dishonest intention from the inception was disputed.

Analysis: The complaint alleged advancement of a loan, repeated renewals, dishonoured cheques, and non-refund of the principal amount, while the defence asserted that payments had been made towards the loan and that the matter was essentially civil in nature. The scope of interference under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was treated as limited to examining whether the complaint disclosed a prima facie case, and it was held that the High Court could not undertake a mini trial or resolve disputed questions of fact at the quashing stage. The allegation that payments were interest or part-repayment and the question whether dishonest intention existed from the inception were held to be matters requiring evidence at trial. The allegations were also found not to be confined to a mere failure to repay a loan simpliciter.

Conclusion: The complaint and continuation of proceedings were not liable to be quashed at the revisional stage; the challenge failed.

Ratio Decidendi: At the stage of quashing under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Court will interfere only where the complaint does not disclose a prima facie offence or the proceedings are patently untenable, and disputed questions of fact or the existence of dishonest intention from inception must ordinarily be left to trial.

---