Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 979 (GAU)

Santiram Das v. State of Assam

2022-09-06

KALYAN RAI SURANA

body2022
ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. M.A. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Bankim Sarma, learned APP for the State respondent no.1. 2. By filing this application under section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the proceedings of CR case no.6768c/2018 under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act which is pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kamrup Metro, Guwahati. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on 11.12.2018, the respondent no.2 has filed complaint case which was registered as CR case no.6768c/2018, alleging dishonor of cheque no.698920 dated 20.08.2018 of Rs.10.00 lakh. It is submitted that during the pendency of the said case, the respondent no.2 had also filed a civil suit on 25.02.2021, claiming the cheque amount of Rs.10.00 lakh as well as interest of Rs.4,04,928/- @ 12% from 27.02.2018 till the date of filing of the said suit. 4. Accordingly, it is submitted that the proceedings of the complaint case was an abuse of the process of the Court and in the event, both the cases are allowed, the petitioner would suffer double jeopardy on account of dishonour of cheque as well as on account of decree, if any, passed in the civil suit. 5. It is also submitted that the respondent no.2 has filed a false and a concocted case and it is submitted that no money was borrowed from the respondent no.2. 6. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, and also perused the materials available on record. 7. It is seen that the complaint case was filed on 11.12.2018 and that prior to the expiry of 3 years from the date of issuance of the dishonoured cheque, a civil suit for recovery of the cheque amount and interest was filed by the respondent no.2. Merely by filing a suit for recovery of cheque amount with interest, would not make the criminal proceeding liable to be quashed. The Court is also unable to accept the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner would suffer double jeopardy, because on the disposal of one case, it would always be open to the petitioner to bring the decision of the Court to the notice of the Court where other case is pending. 8. The Court is also unable to accept the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner would suffer double jeopardy, because on the disposal of one case, it would always be open to the petitioner to bring the decision of the Court to the notice of the Court where other case is pending. 8. From the contents of the complaint case, it cannot be said that no case has prima facie been made out by the respondent no.2 for initiation of the complaint case for dishonour of cheque. It is also seen that in the money suit a specific averment has been made that the petitioner had issued cheque no.698920 dated 20.08.2018 to the respondent no.2 for a sum of Rs.10.00 lakh. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not placed any case law to show that if a money suit is filed subsequently for recovery of the cheque amount, the complaint case filed prior in point of time becomes liable to be quashed. Therefore, there is no material before this Court from where it can be inferred that the complaint case, i.e. C.R. case no.6768c/2018 is an abuse of the process of Court or that it does not disclose any offence. 10. Accordingly, this criminal petition is dismissed at the motion stage without issuing notice on the respondents. 11. The Registry shall transmit a copy of this order to the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kamrup (Metro), Guwahati, to be retained in the record of CR case no.6768c/2018. 12. As indicated above, it would always be permissible for the petitioner to appraise the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup (Metro), Guwahati about the decree, if any, passed by the Court of Civil Judge No.2, Kamrup (Metro), Guwahati in the Money Suit no.158/2022, and vice versa, if any order/ sentence/ compensation is passed/ ordered in the complaint case, it would be permissible to the parties to bring it to the notice of the learned Civil Judge No.2, Kamrup (Metro), Guwahati.