TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 52X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here before this Court to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC. With respect to issue(s) of the execution of the Authority Letter , the phraseology used therein as also the same being improperly executed, non-filing of the complaint under Section 138 NIA by the wife of the respondent no. 2, respondent no. 2 not being either the payee or the holder in due course, and non-certification of the bank memo or the return slip by the bank, in the opinion of this Court, the aforesaid being disputed questions of facts, require trial and due adjudication by the learned Trial Court and not by this Court and that too at this stage, whence the learned MM is already seized of the complaint and has merely passed the summoning order. In the opinion of this Court, if this Court proceeds to consider the aforesaid issues, it would tantamount to holding a mini trial, which as per trite law and under the facts and circumstances involved herein, is per se not permissible under Section 482 CrPC, especially whence the trial before the learned MM is ongoing. This Court cannot substitute or carry out the functions of the learned Trial Court. In any event, considering that the proceeding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n presentation with the details given below:- S.No. In favour of Cheque No. Amount Reason for dishonour 1. Amrit Pal Singh Bedi 666437 Rs. 6,00,000/- Account closed 2. Amrit Pal Singh Bedi 666436 Rs. 6,00,000/- Kindly contact drawer/draw 3. Amrit Pal Singh Bedi 103122 Rs. 10,00,000/- Kindly contact drawer/draw 4. Amrit Pal Singh Bedi 103121 Rs. 10,00,000/- Kindly contact drawer/draw 5. Amrit Pal Singh Bedi 935698 Rs. 8,00,000/- Kindly contact drawer/draw 6. Amrit Pal Singh Bedi 666435 Rs. 6,00,000/- Kindly contact drawer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... memo or the slip cannot be taken into consideration as the same is not certified by the bank in terms of Section 146 NIA. Reliance was placed on the order dated 08.08.2018 passed by the Bombay High Court in Criminal Appeal 360/2017 titled Vandana vs Abhilasha. 9. Learned counsel for petitioner lastly submitted that a single complaint under Section 138 NIA qua all the 9 cheques is not maintainable, as they cannot be clubbed together in view of Section 219 CrPC. Reliance was placed on Vani Agro Enterprises vs. State of Gujarat and Anr. 2019 SCC OnLine SC 2002. 10. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 submitted that the complaint under Section 138 of the NIA filed by the respondent no. 2 before the learned MM is very much maintainable in the present form and there is no infirmity in issuance of the summoning order therein. It is further submitted that the Authority Letter has been properly executed and satisfies all the ingredients thereof as everything is arising out of the same transaction and it is a case involving a husband and his wife. 11. Highlighting the background of the litigation inter-se the parties herein, the learned counsel for the respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same date; and [iii] returned on the same date by the very same Bank. Even though each of the above factors were/ are extremely vital for consideration, however, there are no averments qua them. Also, it is trite law that this Court is to sparingly exercise its powers under Section 482 CrPC and with utmost care and caution, when a party approaching this Court, is able to demonstrate reasonable grounds for the Court to exercise such powers [Re: Parbatbhai Aahir Ors. vs. State of Gujrat Anr. (2017) 9 SCC 641; Kaptan Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh 2021 SCC OnLine SC 580]. A perusal of the pleadings made by the petitioner herein also disclose that there is no such averment exhibiting any special cause and/ or reason made anywhere before this Court to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC. 15. It is also an admitted position that though a composite legal notice qua all the aforesaid 9 cheques involved was issued by both the respondent no. 2 and his wife but the complaint under Section 138 NIA qua the said 9 cheques was filed by the respondent no. 2 only, albeit on the strength of an Authority Letter issued by his wife for 3 cheques which were in favour of h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
