TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 196X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the date of presentation of the cheque is misconceived. It is also mentioned in the aforesaid order that at this stage learned counsel for the applicant submitted that an opportunity be provided to the applicant to repay the money to discharge his liability. So this defence has already been considered and rejected by this court. From the material on record, it is clear that this case does not come under any of the categories as mentioned by the Hon ble Apex Court in the aforesaid case. There is nothing on record to show that the continuation of the proceedings is an abuse of the process of the court. There is no illegality in the impugned summoning order. Application dismissed. - Application U/S 482 No. - 64 of 2002 - - - Dated:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fraud has issued a cheque which could not be cashed. Legal notice was issued through registered post on 7.3.2000 but the opposite parties neither given any reply nor paid the amount. After inquiry under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 9.6.2000 finding that primafacie case under Section 138 N.I. Act and 420 I.P.C is made out, has summoned all the three accused of complaint including applicant for trial. 4. The submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant are that the Bank has shown the reason for return of the cheque is at point no.21 of the memo and that is the alteration in date requires drawer s attestation. The Bank memo for the return of the impugned cheque does not state the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st dated cheque which was mis-used by the opposite party no.2. Learned counsel also contended that the learned Magistrate has failed to consider the legal aspect that dishonour of cheque was not due to insufficiency of funds and illegally summoned the applicant under Section 138 N.I. Act. The continuation of the proceedings before the Magistrate is nothing but an abuse of the process of the court. 5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 contended that opposite party no.2 has supplied the material to the applicant and the applicant has given a cheque. The date and contents of the cheque was admitted by the applicant in second supplementary dated 6.8.2018 and a certified copy of the cheque has been annexed by the applicant. From ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... after hearing the parties arguments at some length, this court on 20.2.2019 has held that all the ingredients of Section 138 N.I. Act as considered by he Apex Court in the case of Jugesh Sehgal vs. Shamsher Singh Gogi 2009 (14) SCC 683 has been made out in cumulative. The conclusion of the learned counsel for the applicant that since it was a post dated cheque the liability was a future liability and it had not accrued on the date of presentation of the cheque is misconceived. It is also mentioned in the aforesaid order that at this stage learned counsel for the applicant submitted that an opportunity be provided to the applicant to repay the money to discharge his liability. So this defence has already been considered and rejected by this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. (i). Where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ggrieved party. (vii). 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. 10. From the material on record, it is clear that this case does not come under any of the categories as mentioned by the Hon ble Apex Court in the aforesaid case. There is nothing on record to show that the continuation of the proceedings is an abuse of the process of the court. There is no illegality in the impugned summoning order. 11. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C is devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Indian Laws ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
