Madras High Court
Golden Petroleum vs R.Arunachalam on 21 June, 2023
Crl.O.P.No.17989 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 21.06.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
Crl.O.P.No.17989 of 2021
and
Crl.M.P.Nos.9889 of 2021
1.Golden Petroleum,
Rep. By its Proprietor,
Smt. Najummunisha,
Thorapalli and Post,
Mysore Road, Gudalore,
Nilgiris – 643211
2. Najummunisha ... Petitioners
Vs.
R.Arunachalam ... Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the
Criminal Procedure Code to call for records of the impugned proceedings
pending in STC.No.109 of 2021, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate,
Mettupalayam and quash the same.
For Petitioner : M/s.W.Camyles Gandhi
For Respondent : Mr.M.Mariappan for E.D.Sethupathi
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.17989 of 2021
ORDER
The petition is to quash the private complaint filed for the offence
under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
2.The allegation is that the petitioners had issued cheques in favour of
the complainant and when the said cheques were presented for collection it
was returned with an endorsement “funds insufficient” and despite the
statutory notices the petitioners did not make the payments.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that even
according to the complaint, the petitioners had borrowed a sum of
Rs.15,00,000/- in the year 2017. While so, the impugned cheques which
were said to have been issued on 05.11.2020, 11.11.2020 & 13.11.2020 are
for time-barred debt and hence the impugned complaint is liable to be
quashed.
4.The learned counsel for the complainant however submitted that the
Hon’ble Apex Court in the judgment reported in (2021) 6 SCC 413 -
S.Natarajan Vs.Sama Dharman and Another had held that the question as
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.17989 of 2021
to whether the debt was time-barred or not cannot be decided at the stage of
quashing the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and this has to be
adjudicated only before the Trial Court.
5. This Court finds that the Hon’ble Apex in (2021) 6 SCC 413 -
S.Natarajan Vs. Sama Dharman and Another held that the question as to
whether the debt was time-barred or not has to be decided only by the Trial
Court, since it is a mixed question of law and fact. The relevant
observations are extracted hereunder for better understanding:-
"7. In our opinion, the High Court erred in quashing the
complaint on the ground that the debt or liability was barred by
limitation and, therefore, there was no legally enforceable debt
or liability against the accused. The case before the High Court
was not of such a nature which could have persuaded the High
Court to draw such a definite conclusion at this stage. Whether
the debt was time barred or not can be decided only after the
evidence is adduced, it being a mixed question of law and fact."
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.17989 of 2021
6. In view of the above observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court, this
Court is not inclined to entertain this quash petition. However, the
petitioners are at liberty to raise all their points before the Trial Court.
Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, the
connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
7. Since the case is of the year 2021, the learned Magistrate may
conduct the trial as expeditiously as possible and preferably complete it
within a period of 6 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. The personal appearance of the second petitioner before the Trial
Court is dispensed with, unless the learned Magistrate deems her presence
necessary for the progress of the Trial.
21.06.2023
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Neutral Citation :Yes/No
shr
To,
The Judicial Magistrate, Mettupalayam.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.17989 of 2021
SUNDER MOHAN. J,
shr
Crl.O.P.No.17989 of 2021
and
Crl.M.P.Nos.9889 of 2021
21.06.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
