Gujarat High Court
Shobhna Kamlesh Pansuriya vs Bajaj Finance Ltd on 4 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24917/2017 ORDER DATED: 04/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 24917 of 2017
==========================================================
SHOBHNA KAMLESH PANSURIYA
Versus
BAJAJ FINANCE LTD., & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
ADITYA A GUPTA(7875) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MOHIT A GUPTA(8967) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR AR GUPTA(1262) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
KALPESH R PATEL(7896) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR. JAY MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 04/11/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"), the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside Criminal Complaiont being 2722 of 2017 pending before the learned 11 th Additional Chief Judicial magistrate, Rajkot and the summoning order dated 3.3.2017 issued by the 11 th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara.
2. Shorn of non-essential details, the relevant factual matrix of the lis in hand is adumbrated thus: The complaint alleges that a cheque bearing No. 34524 dated 16.01.2017 for an amount of Rs.10,45,665/- was issued towards repayment of a loan under Contract No. 416PSB1623192. The said cheque, upon presentation, was dishonoured with the endorsement "Exceeds Arrangement." Consequent thereto, a statutory notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, was issued to the drawer.
Page 1 of 7 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Thu Nov 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 06 23:22:05 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/24917/2017 ORDER DATED: 04/11/2025 undefined Thereafter, the learned 11th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot, took cognizance of the complaint and issued process against the present petitioner.
2.1. It is the case of the petitioner- Shobhna Pansuriya that she is merely a housewife and the wife of accused No. 2, Shri Kamlesh Govindbhai Pansuriya, who is the sole proprietor of accused No. 1 firm in whose account the cheque was drawn. Hence, the present petition.
3. The learned advocate for the petitioner has fervently contended that the initiation and continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner are manifestly unsustainable in law. It is submitted that the petitioner is a housewife having no concern, direct or indirect, with the business affairs of accused No. 1 firm, which is a sole proprietorship concern owned by her husband, accused No. 2 - Shri Kamlesh Govindbhai Pansuriya. The cheque in question was neither drawn nor signed by the petitioner, and the account on which it was issued stands exclusively in the name of the said proprietorship. It is, therefore, urged that there exists no legal substratum to array the petitioner as an accused in the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
3.1. The learned advocate would further submit that even the most fundamental averments necessary to attract criminal liability are conspicuously absent in the complaint. It is a well-settled proposition of law that in the case of a proprietorship concern, there is no concept of vicarious liability, for the proprietor and the concern are one and the same in the eyes of law. In absence whereof, the very foundation of the allegations crumbles. Ergo, the issuance of Page 2 of 7 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Thu Nov 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 06 23:22:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/24917/2017 ORDER DATED: 04/11/2025 undefined process against the petitioner is wholly mechanical and reflects non- application of judicial mind, thereby constituting a clear abuse of the process of law. It is, therefore, prayed that this Court, in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, be pleased to quash the impugned complaint and the consequential proceedings pending before the learned trial Court.
4. The learned advocate appearing for the private respondent has opposed the petition in limine, contending that the cheque in question was admittedly issued towards repayment of the outstanding loan amount under Contract No. 416PSB1623192. It is urged that the petitioner, being the wife of the proprietor of the accused firm, was fully aware of the financial transactions undertaken by her husband and the firm. The learned advocate would submit that the complaint prima facie discloses the commission of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and the same has been rightly entertained by the learned trial Court. The learned Magistrate, after due application of mind, has issued process against all accused persons, and therefore, the petitioner cannot now seek to evade criminal prosecution under the guise of technical pleas.
4.1. It is further submitted that the scope of interference under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is limited and circumscribed, and the inherent powers of this Court are to be exercised sparingly and with great caution. The allegations in the complaint, when taken at their face value, disclose the necessary ingredients of the offence, and this Court ought not to embark upon a meticulous appreciation of evidence or disputed questions of fact at this nascent stage. The veracity or otherwise of the petitioner's claim Page 3 of 7 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Thu Nov 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 06 23:22:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/24917/2017 ORDER DATED: 04/11/2025 undefined that she had no role in the transaction is a matter to be adjudicated during trial, after the evidence is led and tested on the anvil of cross- examination.
4.2. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, adopting the submissions advanced on behalf of the private respondent, has also opposed the grant of any relief to the petitioner. It is urged that the order issuing process does not suffer from any infirmity warranting interference by this Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction. The learned APP submits that the complaint, when read as a whole, discloses a triable issue, and quashing the proceedings at this stage would tantamount to stifling a legitimate prosecution at its threshold.
5. I have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the material available on record with due circumspection.
6. Upon a conspectus of the submissions advanced by both sides, what emerges as a salient feature is that Bajaj Finance Ltd., though asserting that Avadh Trading Corporation was a partnership firm, has conspicuously failed to produce any documentary evidence to substantiate, demonstrate, or establish that Avadh Trading Corporation was, in fact, a partnership concern or that the present petitioner, Shobhna Pansuriya, was one of its partners actively engaged in the day-to-day affairs of such firm.
6.1. Per contra, the unimpeachable documentary evidence on record namely, the sanction letter of the loan issued by the Bank of India in favour of Avadh Trading Corporation indubitably reveals that the said entity was a proprietorship concern, with Mr. Kamlesh Page 4 of 7 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Thu Nov 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 06 23:22:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/24917/2017 ORDER DATED: 04/11/2025 undefined Govindbhai Pansuriya being its sole proprietor.
6.2. In view of the aforesaid factual milieu, the petitioner cannot, by any stretch of legal imagination, be fastened with vicarious liability under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. She has neither availed the loan in question nor does the averment in the private complaint attribute to her any role, participation, or involvement in the alleged transaction.
7. In the light of the foregoing discussion, the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner would, ex facie, amount to an abuse of the process of law and, therefore, cannot be countenanced.
8. It would be apposite to refer the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, wherein, in Paragraph 102, it is held as under:
"102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Ch. XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Art. 226 or the inherent powers under sec. 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 Page 5 of 7 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Thu Nov 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 06 23:22:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/24917/2017 ORDER DATED: 04/11/2025 undefined formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under sec. 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of sec. 155(2) of the Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a noncognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under sec. 155(2) of the Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of Page 6 of 7 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Thu Nov 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 06 23:22:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/24917/2017 ORDER DATED: 04/11/2025 undefined the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(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."
9. Accordingly, in exercise of the inherent powers conferred under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Criminal Complaint No. 2722 of 2017 pending before the learned 11th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot, as well as the summoning order dated 03.03.2017 passed by the learned 11th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara, are hereby quashed and set aside.
10. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
11. Furthermore, considering that the criminal case arising under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act has been pending since 2017, the learned trial Court is directed to expedite the proceedings and conclude the trial against the remaining accused with utmost expedition, preferably within a period of nine months from the date of receipt of this order.
(J. C. DOSHI,J) MANISH MISHRA Page 7 of 7 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Thu Nov 06 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Nov 06 23:22:05 IST 2025