2020 (11) TMI 399

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y the learned ASJ, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi whereby the petitioner's challenge to the summoning order dated 05.09.2018 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in C.C. No. 3738/2018 was dismissed. 2. The brief facts as noted in the impugned order are reproduced herein below:- "In brief the facts leading to the present revision are that the respondent herein filed a complaint u/s 200 Cr.P.C. against the revisionist for an offence punishable u/s 138 NI Act stating therein that it is a company dealing in trading of several medicines all over India. The revisionist is engaged in the business of medicines and approached it for purchase of medicines on credit basis. Accordingly, a running account of the revisio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....k of India 926090. Security Deposit should be given in favour of CADIZ Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Delhi. 22. Enclosed 2 Blank Cheques details 926090-926091, SBI Indore." 5. From the above, it is apparent that at the time of entering into aforesaid agreement, two other cheques were given. The first cheque bearing no. 926089 for Rs. 1 lac was given for proposed security deposit for Medley (Zenkare Division) and another cheque bearing no. 926090 was given towards security. The 'cheque in question' bearing no. 926091 was also handed over in terms of Column No. 22 but no purpose was mentioned. A perusal of the impugned order should also show that rival contentions of both the parties were noted. The complainant contended that on petitioner's f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oceeding under Section 482 of the Code. 6. In Padal Venkata Rama Reddy v. Kovvuri Satyanarayana Reddy [(2011) 12 SCC 437 : (2012) 1 SCC (Cri) 603], this Court, explaining the law on the scope of Section 482 of the Code, has observed, in para 32, as under: (SCC p. 448) "32. It would not be proper for the High Court to analyse the case of the complainant in the light of all the probabilities in order to determine whether conviction would be sustainable and on such premise arriving at a conclusion that the proceedings are to be quashed. In a proceeding instituted on a complaint, exercise of inherent powers to quash the proceedings is called for only in a case in which the complaint does not disclose any offence or is frivolous, vexatious o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nder Section 138 of the NI Act." 8. In so far as issuance of blank cheque is concerned, in Bir Singh v. Mukesh Kumar reported as (2019) 4 SCC 197, the Supreme Court held that if a signed blank cheque is voluntarily presented to a payee towards some payment, the filling up of an amount and other particulars by the payee would not invalidate the cheque. The onus to prove that the cheque was not in discharge of any debt or liability would still remain on the accused which is to be discharged by adducing evidence. 9. Whether the cheque in question was issued towards the security and not towards any debt or liability is a matter of defence which could be determined in the trial on the petitioner adducing his evidence. 10. At this stage, I deem....