TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (11) TMI 725
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... well as Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing and setting aside the complaint being Criminal Case No.825 of 2019 pending before the learned 6th Additional C.J.M., Anand under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as the 'N.I. Act' for short) and the consequential proceedings, if any, initiated in pursuance thereof . 3. It is contended in the petition that respondent no.2 preferred the complaint contending that the accused of Criminal Case No.825 of 2019 came in his contact through his younger brother, Pankajbhai Poonambhai Patel. The accused developed friendly terms and thereafter as were in need of money asked hand loan from the present respondent no.2 through intervention of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ase No.825 of 2019 has been filed in the Court of 6th Additional C.J.M. and Summons were issued to both the accused vide order dated 18.03.2019. The present petitioner has contended that she is not the signatory to the dishonoured Cheque and the said Cheque was issued from the Joint Account maintained by her along with her husband and thus on that ground stated that she cannot be held liable under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the N.I. Act and thus prayed for quashing and setting aside the process issued against her in Criminal Case No.825 of 2019. 4. Heard Mr. P.P. Majmudar, learned advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Johnsey P.Macwan, learned advocate for respondent no.2 and Ms. Monali Bhatt, learned APP for the State. 5. Mr. P.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... husband and the said impugned cheque is not signed by the present petitioner. 8. In the case of Jugesh Sehgal Vs. Shamsher Singh Gogi, reported in (2009) 14 SCC 683, the following ingredients to constitute the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, has been laid down. "(i) a person must have drawn a cheque on an account maintained by him in a bank for payment of a certain amount of money to another person from out that account. (ii) the cheque should have been issued for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability; (iii) that cheque has been presented to the bank within a period of six months from the date on which it is drawn or within the period of its validity whichever is earlier....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ases, ex debito justitiate to do the real and substantial justice. The inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the High Court to act according to whim or caprice. The powers have to be exercised sparingly, with circumspection and in the rarest of rare cases, where the Court is convinced, on the basis of material on record, that allowing the proceedings to continue would be an abuse of the process of the court or that the ends of justice require that the proceedings ought to be quashed. 8.2 In case of State of Haryana V. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604, the Apex Court formulated as many as seven categories of cases, wherein the extraordinary power under Section 482 could be exercised by the High Court to prevent ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... said amount of money by giving a notice in writing, to the drawer of the cheque, within thirty days of the receipt of information by him from the bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid; and (c) the drawer of such cheque fails to make the payment of the said amount of money to the payee or, as the case may be, to the holder in due course of the cheque within fifteen days of the receipt of the said notice. Explanation.- For the purposes of this section, "debt or other liability" means a legally enforceable debt or other liability". 9.1 The plain reading of Section 138 makes it clear that it has to be strictly interpreted, as penal provision is made for commission of offence as prescribed under Section 138 of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....action with the complainant on her personal basis, thus, she cannot be made vicariously liable for the act of the husband. It appears that the learned trial Court Judge has not considered the averments of the complaint and has not examined the status of the proposed accused prior to order for issuance of summons against the present petitioner, who was joined in the criminal proceedings merely under the status of being wife of the accused no.1 and holding a joint account with the husband. She could have been prosecuted only when the Cheque has been signed by both of them as joint account holder. The learned Judge while determining the question whether any process is to be issued or not, has to be satisfied whether there is sufficient ground ....