https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774408 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. en-us Fri, 04 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Jul 2025 08:50:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774408 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. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 04 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774408