Accused in a cheque bounce case filing frivolous counter criminal case against the complainant. The same amounts to abuse of process of law. Proceedings quashed. Karnataka High Court.

Rajashekar vs State by Banavasi PS. Criminal Petition 8846/2015 decided on 3 November 2020.

Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/347381/1/CRLP8846-16-03-11-2020.pdf

Relevant Paragraphs: 12. In the instant case, the second respondent who  is a defacto complaint initiated criminal prosecution against the petitioner who is arraigned as accused by registering private complaint in PCR No.13/2015 based upon which Crime No.111/2015 came to be registered by the first respondent for the aforesaid offences. As already stated in detail that the petitioner/accused when he presented cheque which was issued by the second respondent for a sum of Rs.6,60,000/- at his banker Corporation Bank, Shiralakoppa branch, Shikaripura Taluk, Shimoga, the said cheque was returned with a  shara stating “ insufficient fund” and “signature differs”. This ground was also urged in this petition for seeking intervention of the criminal prosecution initiated against the petitioner/accused. The petitioner/accused is a close relative of second respondent and also a progressive agriculturist who approached the second respondent offering to cultivate the land belonging to him.

13. Further the offence alleged against the petitioner under Section 418 of IPC that the petitioner has cheated the second respondent is also not correct as  the  allegations made in the complaint does not attract the ingredients of Section 418 of IPC. Similarly the ingredients of Sections 420 and 468 of IPC also does not attract in the present case. These are all the facts that reveals in the materials available on record.

14. It is relevant to refer the scope and object of Section 482 of Cr.P.C. which deals with the inherent powers of the Court which has to be exercised judicially, judiciously, sparingly and cautiously, if not, there shall be miscarriage of justice and so also, abuse of process of law. While exercising the jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. the Court would not ordinarily embark upon an enquiry whether evidence in question is reliable or not  or whether on a reasonable appreciation of it, the accusation would not be sustained.  Section 482 Cr.P.C it is only to intervene with judicially and judiciously in order to avoid the abuse of process of law and also to secure the ends of justice.

Compiled by S. Basavaraj, Advocate, Daksha Legal.