TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 1306X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and perusing the record of the case alongwith the precedent law cited at the Bar, this Court is of the opinion that on the face of it, the impugned FIR is nothing but a counterblast, as the respondent became aware of the cheques being dishonoured on 29.03.2017 and out of fear of the proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complaint was lodged on 30.03.2017. As the complainant had the knowledge that he shall be facing the proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act and there was no reason available with the present petitioner, so as to stole the cheques in concern. In light of the aforesaid discussion as well as the precedent law cited by learned counsel for the petitioner, the present misc. petition is allowed and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 3133 pertaining to payment of ₹ 1,50,000/- each have been presented before the Bank by the present petitioner. On receiving such SMS, the respondent has initiated the requisite proceedings. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that on the face of it, the FIR is highly improbable, as allegedly on 21.02.2017, the cheques were stolen, regarding which the complainant has never made a complaint. However, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that at the first instance, when the cheques were produced before the Bank on 29.03.2017, the complainant immediately filed the complaint on 30.03.2017, which means that even the requisite time for ascertaining the theft or the details of the cheques was not available with the comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court dismissed the revision petition on 16.1.2009, by inter alia observing as under: 12. Truthfulness or falsity of the allegations, essentially pertains to the realm of evidence and the same cannot be pre-judged at this initial stage. I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. Consequently, this Revision Petition is dismissed in limine while making it clear that anything herein shall not be construed as an opinion on merits at trial. 37. The appeal was filed against the aforesaid judgment of the High Court by the Accused contending that there was sufficient material collected in the investigation which proved that allegations were unfounded and the prosecution of the Appellant was an abuse of process of the Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es summarized in the foregoing two paragraphs; we are satisfied, that all the steps delineated by this Court in Rajiv Thapar's case (supra) stand-satisfied. All the steps can only be answered in the affirmative. We therefore have no hesitation whatsoever in concluding, that judicial conscience of the High Court ought to have persuaded it, on the basis of the material available before it, while passing the impugned order, to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against the accused- Appellant, in exercise of the inherent powers vested with it Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, based on the conclusions drawn hereinabove, we are satisfied, that the first information report registered Under Sections 328, 35 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Lal, which is to the following effect: (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the Accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. Above Category 7 is clearly attracted in the facts of the present case. Although, the High Court has noted the judgment of the State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, but did not advert to the relevant facts of the present case, materials on which Final Report was submitted by the IO. We, thus, are fully satisfied that the present is a fit case where High Court ought to have exercised its jurisdiction Under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure and quashed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt law laid down by the Hon ble Apex Court in State of Haryana Ors. Vs. Ch.Bhajan Lal Ors.,1992 Supp.(1) SCC 335, condition No.7 of which in relation to interference by the Court with the proceedings reads as under:- 7. Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. Thus, the aforequoted condition No.7 is clearly attracted in the present case, as the complainant had the knowledge that he shall be facing the proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act and there was no reason available with the present petitioner, so as to stole ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
