Dipamani Begum vs Subjan Nessa
2022 Latest Caselaw 976 Gua

                                                                             Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010052982022




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                  Case No. : Crl.Pet./229/2022

            DIPAMANI BEGUM
            W/O- NAZRUL HAQUE, D/O- RAMESH ALI, R/O- VILL.- BHAKUATEPA, P.O.
            RAULY, P.S. SARTHEBARI, DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM



            VERSUS

            SUBJAN NESSA
            W/O- FORMAN ALI, R/O- VILL. AND P.O. BARNI, P.S. HAJO, DIST.- KAMRUP,
            PIN- 781102.



Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A Y CHOUDHURY
Advocate for the Respondent :


                                   BEFORE
                  HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

                                            ORDER

21.03.2022 Heard Shri TA Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner, who has filed this application under Section 482 CrPC read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the proceedings in connection with NI Case No. 36/2021 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class-III, Hajo, Kamrup.

The learned counsel has submitted that there is no legal liability and the cheque in question was issued to the Bank as a security without any amounts being written. It is Page No.# 2/2

alleged that the cheques were stolen by the respondent's son and there is misuse of the provision of law. The learned counsel has also submitted that in this regard information was also lodged on 25.02.2021 and the stop payment instruction was given to the Bank on 23.02.2021.

The learned counsel has also relied upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Raj Kumar Khurana Vs. State of (NCT of Delhi) , reported in (2009) 6 SCC

72. It is submitted that in the said case, return of cheques where a loss report was lodged has been held to be a ground of defence.

This Court is of the opinion that the aforesaid facts may be good grounds for defence but cannot be grounds of invoking the extraordinary powers conferred under Section 482 of the CrPC. Moreover, in the instance case, the instruction to the Bank dated 23.02.2021 is on the subject of stop payment only where there is no mention of any loss or any police report lodged in this connection. Powers conferred to a High Court by Section 482 Cr.PC are almost plenary in nature and there does not seem to be any restrictions in the statute. However, as in the case of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the restriction is a self imposed one and the powers are to be exercised in exceptional circumstances to prevent abuse of the process or to prevent miscarriage of justice.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a recent judgment reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 315 (M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharasshtra and Ors) has held as follows-

"23(iv). The power of quashing should be exercised sparingly with circumspection, as it has been observed, in the 'rarest of rare cases (not to be confused with the formation in the context of death penalty)."

In that view of the matter, the instant petition is dismissed.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant