A.Mohanakumar vs C.Thirunavukarasu
2022 Latest Caselaw 4547 Mad

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 4547 Mad
Judgement Date : 8 March, 2022

Madras High Court

A.Mohanakumar vs C.Thirunavukarasu on 8 March, 2022

                                                              1

                       BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                    DATED: 08.03.2022

                                                          CORAM:

                           THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

                                               Crl.O.P.(MD) No.3598 of 2022


                     A.Mohanakumar                                                 ...Petitioner

                                                                  Vs.


                     C.Thirunavukarasu                                             ...Respondent

                     PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
                     praying to to call for the records and quash the proceedings in C.C.No.52
                     of 2021 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Aranthangi.


                                       For Petitioner     : Mr.K.Baalasundharam


                                                           ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking direction to quash the entire

proceedings in C.C.No.52 of 2021, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate,

Aranthangi.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2.It is seen from the records that on the complaint lodged by the

respondent alleging that on 24.10.2018, the petitioner borrowed amount

and in order to repay the same, he issued the cheque. The said cheque

was presented for collection and same has been returned for the reason

'Insufficient funds'. After causing legal notice, the complaint has been

lodged.

3.The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit

that the petitioner is innocent and he had not committed any offence as

alleged in the complaint. Hence he prayed to quash the same.

4.Perused the materials available on record.

5.It is relevant to rely upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court of India passed in Crl.A.No.579 of 2019 dated 02.04.2019 in the

case of Devendra Prasad Singh Vs. State of Bihar & Anr., as follows:-

" 12.So far as the second ground is concerned, we are of the view that the High Court while hearing the application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. had no jurisdiction to appreciate the statement of the witnesses https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

and record a finding that there were inconsistencies in their statements and, therefore, there was no prima facie case made out against respondent No.2. In our view, this could be done only in the trial while deciding the issues on the merits or/and by the Appellate Court while deciding the appeal arising out of the final order passed by the Trial Court but not in Section 482 Cr.P.C. proceedings.

13.In view of the foregoing discussion, we allow the appeal, set aside the impugned order and restore the aforementioned complaint case to its original file for being proceeded with on merits in accordance with law.

6.Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dealing in respect

of the very same issue in Crl.A.No.1572 of 2019 dated 17.10.2019 in the

case of Central Bureau of Invstigation Vs. Arvind Khanna, wherein, it

has been held as follows:

“19. After perusing the impugned order and on hearing the submissions made by the learned senior counsels on both sides, we are of https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

the view that the impugned order passed by the High Court is not sustainable. In a petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the High Court has recorded findings on several disputed facts and allowed the petition. Defence of the accused is to be tested after appreciating the evidence during trial. The very fact that the High Court, in this case, went into the most minute details, on the allegations made by the appellant-C.B.I., and the defence put-forth by the respondent, led us to a conclusion that the High Court has exceeded its power, while exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

20.In our view, the assessment made by the High Court at this stage, when the matter has been taken cognizance by the Competent Court, is completely incorrect and uncalled for.”

7.Further the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India also held in the

order dated 02.12.2019 in Crl.A.No.1817 of 2019 in the case of

M.Jayanthi Vs. K.R.Meenakshi & anr, as follows:

"9. It is too late in the day to seek reference to any authority for the proposition https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

that while invoking the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing a complaint or a charge, the Court should not embark upon an enquiry into the validity of the evidence available. All that the Court should see is as to whether there are allegations in the complaint which form the basis for the ingredients that constitute certain offences complained of. The Court may also be entitled to see (i) whether the preconditions requisite for taking cognizance have been complied with or not; and (ii) whether the allegations contained in the complaint, even if accepted in entirety, would not constitute the offence alleged. ..............

13. A look at the complaint filed by the appellant would show that the appellant had incorporated the ingredients necessary for prosecuting the respondents for the offences alleged. The question whether the appellant will be able to prove the allegations in a manner known to law would arise only at a later stage...................."

The above judgments are squarely applicable to this case and as such, the

points raised by the petitioners cannot be considered by this Court under

Section 482 Cr.P.C.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

8.The petitioner seeking to quash the entire proceedings in CC.52

of 2021, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Aranthangi, without any

ground. All the grounds raised by the petitioner are factual in nature and

it has to be decided only after full fledged trial. In view of the above

discussion, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.

52 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Aranthangi.

The petitioner is at liberty to raise all the grounds before the trial Court.

The trial Court is directed to complete the trial within a period of six